- ALAC - lists.icann.org

ALAC Comment on IPC/BC Access Model
by Holly Raiche April 8, 2018

April 8, 2018

Folks As we said in the ALAC Statement on the GDPR – now being voted upon – one of the outstanding critical issues will be accreditation of those who are given access to personal information from the Whois database. The IPC/BC community within the GNSO has developed a ‘Draft Accreditation and Access Model for non-public Whois Data’ which they are putting forward for discussion. Indeed, they recently held a webinar on the model – at the usually impossible time for Australia. They have also set up a mailing list on the issue and the documents they used for the webinar are supposed to be available for those on the mailing list. (I haven’t seen them as yet) The first thing to note about that model is that is that it is very much the creature of the IPC/BC constituency. The NCSG were not consulted and are developing their response to the accreditation model. My understanding is that the Registries/Registrars also did not provide input into that model. We should also comment - either through a Google Doc or on the wiki, but - in a very short space of time - we should be developing at least some response to the IPC/BC proposal. No response to their model could otherwise be taken as tacit community consent to its proposals. My two major issues with the model are as below. Please feel free to comment as well. My basic issue with their Access Model is that it confuses data ‘use’ with the ‘purpose’ of collection. Under basic data protection law, personal information can only be collected for specified and legitimate purposes of the data collector (ICANN and registrars) and not further processed in ways inconsistent with the legitimate purpose(s). The ALAC has suggested that feedback from the European DPAs will assist in determining the purposes consistent with ICANN and the Registries purpose in collection of that data. The purpose suggested in the Interim Model is not as broad as suggested by this Access Model and, in my view, preferable. (See Annex A, Access Model). The Access Model proposed suggests that, once parties are accredited, they would gain access to all the Whois Information. In my view, any access to personal information should be in limited circumstances only - that blanket access not be given. In a law enforcement context, search warrants generally need some kind of judicial sanction, based on apprehension of possible criminality, before premises can be searched and/or persons apprehended. While an access request test probably would not be quite that stringent, I could not support access seekers being given blanket permission to access personal information generally; there should be a requirement for reasonable grounds to suspect unlawful or harmful action in specific circumstances (carefully defined) before access given. Holly

5 7

Fwd: [APAC Space] Community Discussion on Accreditation and Access Model for Non-Public WHOIS Data
by Holly Raiche April 6, 2018

April 6, 2018

Folks This includes a link to the proposed accreditation model. The timing isn’t crash hot for the APAC region, for those who are interested, please register. I”ll read up on this and my suggestion is that we open up a wiki to discuss this model, since we have not been consulted about it. This was the one outstanding issue we had for the Interim Model, and this is our chance to have a look. When I have had a chance to look at it, I”ll post comments and hope others will have a look as well Holly Begin forwarded message: > From: ajay(a)xgenplus.com > Subject: Re: [APAC Space] Community Discussion on Accreditation and Access Model for Non-Public WHOIS Data > Date: 6 April 2018 1:15:23 pm AEST > To: discuss(a)apacspace.asia > Reply-To: discuss(a)apacspace.asia > > > Since business and IP constituency is leading it, I would request to address the followings. > > 1. Will registered trade name owners rights be protected or diluted in this new proposed model. > > 2. Any possibility to register and link TradeMark registeration details with domain Whois. > > Looking forward to attend the call > > Thanks > > Ajay > > > > > On 06-Apr-2018 at 07:33:46 > Joyce Chen 'joyce.chen(a)icann.org' wrote: > Dear APAC Space members, > > You are invited to join a call tonight at 22:00 SGT / 14:00 UTC led by the Business and Intellectual Property (IP) Constituencies in ICANN to seek community’s input on the Accreditation and Access Model for Non-Public WHOIS Data, which is proposed to be implemented in parallel with the Proposed Interim Compliance Model for GDPR. The duration of the call will be two hours. > > To join this call, please email admin-accred-model(a)icann.org for call details. > > You may wish to refer to the call invitation here:http://www.ipconstituency.org/assets/Outreach/Invitation%20to%20Commun… > > Thank you. > > Warm Regards, > Joyce Chen > GSE Strategy & Development Senior Manager > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > Direct Line: +65 6816 1287 > Mobile: +65 8338 8653 > Email: joyce.chen(a)icann.org > Skype: joyce.chen.icann > www.icann.org > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "APAC Space Discussion" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to discuss+unsubscribe(a)apacspace.asia. > To post to this group, send email to discuss(a)apacspace.asia. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/group/discuss/. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/d/msgid/discuss/FC2F3EF7-CB7F-4A…. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/d/optout. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "APAC Space Discussion" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to discuss+unsubscribe(a)apacspace.asia. > To post to this group, send email to discuss(a)apacspace.asia. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/group/discuss/. > To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/d/msgid/discuss/899383338.8…. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/a/apacspace.asia/d/optout.

1 1

Public Comment on changes to Community TLDs
by Alan Greenberg April 4, 2018

April 4, 2018

Community TLDs have been of interest and importance to At-Large. ICANN has put out a proposal for how such TLDs could be changed once delegated and Justine Chew volunteered to look at it. In general, the draft procedure is fine, but Justine did identify a few places where change is warranted and has drafted a statement. The comment period formally closed yesterday, but we have a short extension. Please review the draft comment at https://community.icann.org/x/fBW8B, and if you have any thoughts, please add a comment to the Wiki prior to 23:59 UTC on Thursday, 05 April 2018. For the record, I support the comment and thank Justine for doing this. Alan

1 0

GDPR statement
by Alan Greenberg April 3, 2018

April 3, 2018

Bastiaan has drafted what I think is an excellent statement summarizing our discussion on GDPR at the last ALAC meeting, slightly amended by me. It is posted at https://community.icann.org/x/Ay68B as the version to be voted on. Please review immediately and let us know if there are any errors or omissions. It will be submitted tomorrow morning EU time. Alan

9 8

KSK Rollover Statement
by Alan Greenberg April 1, 2018

April 1, 2018

Based on discussions during this week's ALAC Meeting, I have posted a final version of the statement to be submitted. I beleive it covers all of the issues raised and makes a number of clear and understandable statements - https://community.icann.org/x/dw28B. The submission deadline is tomorrow so please take a look at it and let me know if there are any errors in it. Alan

10 9

Re: [ALAC] KSK Rollover Statement
by tijani.benjemaa＠topnet.tn April 1, 2018

April 1, 2018

The statement looks good for me. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- TIJANI BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 +216 52 385 114 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Le 31 mars 2018 à 23:48, Javier Rua <javrua(a)gmail.com> a écrit : > > Thanks Alan; I have read it and agree. > > Javier Rúa-Jovet > +1-787-396-6511 > twitter: @javrua > skype: javier.rua1 > https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua > > > > On Mar 31, 2018, at 6:24 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> > wrote: > > >> Based on discussions during this week's ALAC Meeting, I have posted a >> final version of the statement to be submitted. I beleive it covers all >> of the issues raised and makes a number of clear and understandable >> statements - https://community.icann.org/x/dw28B. >> >> The submission deadline is tomorrow so please take a look at it and let >> me know if there are any errors in it. >> >> Alan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac >> >> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >> ALAC Working >> Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

1 0

Re: [ALAC] KSK Rollover Statement
by bartlett.morgan April 1, 2018

April 1, 2018

I can live with this. I will support this draft. -Bart Sent from Samsung Focus-------- Original message --------From: Ricardo Holmquist <rihogris(a)gmail.com> Date: 4/1/18 5:05 AM (GMT-04:00) To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> Cc: ALAC <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [ALAC] KSK Rollover Statement Thank you Alan,Looks very good for me. Best Ricardo On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 00:30, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: Based on discussions during this week's ALAC Meeting, I have posted a final version of the statement to be submitted. I beleive it covers all of the issues raised and makes a number of clear and understandable statements - https://community.icann.org/x/dw28B. The submission deadline is tomorrow so please take a look at it and let me know if there are any errors in it. Alan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

1 0

DNSSEC KSK Rollover test
by Alan Greenberg March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

Please take a moment to go to http://dnssec-failed.org. One of two things will happen: 1. You will not be able to reach the site. or 2. You will get a page on Comcast Network Management. If 2 is your result, the DNS resolver you are using is NOT DNSSEC-enabled and the KSK Rollover will be invisible to you. If you will be on the ALAC meeting, please do this before the meeting so you can report your results. Alan

12 14

KSK Rollover on today's ALAC Agenda
by Alan Greenberg March 29, 2018

March 29, 2018

Here is my last try at summarizing things. What is wrong or missing? ----------------- What I am hearing (extrapolated) is: * Our community understands the need to roll the KSK but is divided on which path to follow at this point. * We want an intense awareness campaign including targetting ISPs, Telcos, Major industries. Use RIRs where they can identify potential DNS providers. * Information packet we can send to our community (ALSes, Individual Members) to get them to prompt their local ISPs or others and which can be similarly used by other constituencies within ICANN. * A holistic review of the situation (including a risk assessment of alternatives) in time for further discussion at ICANN62, including the then current state of whatever data is available and forecast of Sentinal availability. * We would like to better understand under what conditions a rollover date change is possible to avoid doing it at the end of a week.

7 7

Multistakeholder Ethos Award Submission
by Alan Greenberg March 29, 2018

March 29, 2018

As per the decision of the ALAC today, I have nominated Stephane Van Gelder for the Multistakeholder Ethos Award. Alan ===================== 1. Demonstrated ability to work across community lines with both familiar and unfamiliar ICANN Stakeholders with the aim of consensus building and collaboration that substantiate ICANN's multistakeholder model; >Stephane was the classic example someone who was from one particular >constituency within ICANN, but clearly believed that all voices must >be heard and given due consideration. The discussion and e-mail >traffic within At-Large and the ALAC discussing the possibility for >this submission was truly amazing. People who one would have thought >would have had no contact with Stephane all had stories of how they >collaborated with him in some way over the years. 2. Facilitator of dialogue and open discussion in a fair and collegial manner, through the spirit of collaboration as shown through empathy and demonstrating a sincere desire to engage with people from other backgrounds, cultures, and interests; >As Chair of the GNSO Counsel and later Chair of the Nominating >Committee, Stephane had ample opportunity to deal with difficult and >contentious situations. Based on the reports of all who have worked >with him in both environments, he tirelessly met the challenge with >his characteristic aplomb showing even-handedness, intelligence, >sensitivity, positive attitude and of course, humor. 3. Demonstrated additional devotional factors exhibited by time spent supporting ICANN's multistakeholder model and its overall effectiveness through volunteer service via working groups or committees. >Stephane served in a wide variety of roles in ICANN for almost 20 >year. No matter how much one cares about the Internet and ICANN and >one's business interests, to do that for such a period of time >signals a very high level of devotion. The submission is being made in my capacity of Chair of the ALAC based on a formal decision of the ALAC. However, I would like to add a personal note. I do so with some concern, since as a past member of the Ethos Award Panel, I have questioned whether panelists should submit candidates (and several have over the years). This is an exceptional case. The submission was of course triggered by Stephane's untimely death yesterday. But there are few people in ICANN who I believe merit this award as much as Stephane did and does. I worked with Stephane when I was ALAC Liaison to the GNSO and he was Chair. His ability to make me feel a true part of the Council and not an interloper is something for which I am very grateful.

3 2