All very good points Theo, food for thought certainly. Sent from Chris on the move! On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 6:41 PM +0100, "theo geurts" <gtheo@xs4all.nl> wrote: Hi all, I think we are jumping the gun when it comes to the de-accreditation approach as proposed by the poll from last week. While trying to come up with a process, it became rather messy, and eventually, I gave up, as every solution was rather poor. So I reversed the process and started with the accreditation process to see if that would yield better results. The process for registrars offering privacy services or its affiliates is not problematic as we roughly have an idea and we have the WG recommendations. Now the non-affiliated third party privacy providers (NA-TPPP), that is a rather different beast.  A classic example for those who spend time in the data metrics policy making WG where you can't qualify or quantify a problem, and you can't turn to the CPH to ask them for information or input due to the fact these TPPP are not regulated at all. NA-TPPP who or what are they? Some of them seem to be on the surface semi-professional while others seem to be a hobby project that grown out of portion and the rest is somewhere in between. The business model they use: You give them your registrant data, and they give you a set of privacy information that you can use at your registrar for free. One has to wonder how sustainable this business model is. How to onboard an NA-TPPP? For Registrars it is easy to get ICANN accredited in a sense, there is a good reason. A Registrar wants to register .com domain names? Then the requirement is to become ICANN accredited and only then you can start the accreditation process with Verisign. Onboarding an NA-TPPPs sounds like selling ice cream on the north pole. We barely have an idea who they are, and for sure they have no idea who or what ICANN is (sorry if I am bursting some bubbles here). Outreach will be problematic. Fees. NA-TPPPs do not sell domain names, they "offer" a service. For every registration and renewal a Registrar pays 18 cents to ICANN, wich goes into the ICANN budget. RDE Though the NA-TTTP might (it better be) have the registrant data, the Registrar is not included in this escrow deposit as they do not know where the privacy service info is used by the registrant. WDRP Audit requirement, who is going to pay for this? ERRP See WDRP ICANN involvement when NA-TPPP goes out of business. Worst case scenario the NA-TPPP gets breached and loses all data and backups. This has happened before in the past. ICANN would have to reach out to all registrants and somehow get Registrars in the mix. I am not sure how this scenario would unfold. Most likely it will be a costly business. Operational concerns IRTP C. This discussion still needs to take place somewhere. But if an NA-TPPP goes down we need to make sure that there is no loss of domain names or exposure of personal data. I think I am going to stop here for now. But I think we still need to get the accreditation process done first and then move on to the de-accreditation part. Best regards, Theo Geurts