I possibly won't care who provides the non-contact data so long as it is always instantly and freely available. I'd like to know what Rys have to say about all traffic moving from Rrs to them. From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@key-systems.net> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 7:22 AM To: Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv@microsoft.com> Cc: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] SSAD as a means of publishing non-personal data Hi Mark, quite honestly, that is TBD and depends where we end up. If RDAP turns out the way I proposed, data transfer is possible, so it does not matter who provides the data. The question is where we as a community want the data to be published. I think we can agree that duplication is not likely to be needed so it would be either Rr or Ry. Which one does not matter that much to me. -- Volker A. Greimann General Counsel and Policy Manager KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH T: +49 6894 9396901 M: +49 6894 9396851 F: +49 6894 9396851 W: www.key-systems.net<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.key-sys...> Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835 CEO: Oliver Fries and Robert Birkner Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in England and Wales with company number 8576358. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended only for the person(s) directly addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, transmission, distribution, or other forms of dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this email with any files that may be attached. On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 4:11 PM Mark Svancarek (CELA) <marksv@microsoft.com<mailto:marksv@microsoft.com>> wrote: Volker, earlier in this discussion you seemed to be suggesting that register-provided RDAP would go away, with all data (including non-contact data such as the registrar field) moving behind the SSAD paywall. Or perhaps you were suggesting that such RDAP access be available only from a registry. Did I understand correctly? From: Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg via Gnso-epdp-team Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 7:03 AM To: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann@key-systems.net>> Cc: EPDP <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Gnso-epdp-team] SSAD as a means of publishing non-personal data At 2021-04-22 09:10 AM, Volker Greimann wrote: 1. SSAD was approved by the PDPD consensus, by the GNSO council with sufficient votes and by the board. It will exist. If it does not, we will be forced back to the drawing board for another couple of years and the status quo will persist. If you prefer that over SSAD, go ahead and kill SSAD. This is not about my trying to kill the SSAD. At this point, the Board needs to make a decision, and presumably it will not just blindly rubber-stamp the GNSO recommendations. And iyou are not addressing proposing a solution that is at best several years out to 2. This would be questions for the implementation phase, but maybe some guidance would be helpful to put people here at ease. I do not think there needs to be authentication for basic SSAD access. The terms currently in place for domain name registration are fully sufficient for that access level: Validation of format of the data, verification of email address, valid payment method. This would be my personal view. 3. As this access level would require significantly lower barriers than full access, fees for this type of requests could be lower as well. For comparison, requests for data from the German trade register cost medium one-digit EUR amounts per request. The added benefit is that this common type of request could carry a base cost load for the system, allowing lower overall costs for all requests. Only leaving SSAD for personal data would on the other hand drive up costs. The more we include in SSAD, the better the price structure should be. OK, so you are proposing a fee-based system for such requests. 4. If we do need another PDP (not convinced that we do) this could be pre-determined and targeted. If we all agree now that we want this to happen, debate the specifics before the PDP is launched, the time needed for the actual PDP could be minimal. Fine. Adding several more years... 5. To the contrary, there are a myrad of advantages: Use of existing infrastructure, lower overall SSAD fees, better protection of registrants, access controls, prevention of harvesting for illicit purposes (SPAM, phishing, etc) , requestor ID, reduced risk for CPs, no need to build out yet another system for a sub-category of domain names, no data transfer liability issues, etc. The list goes on and on... -- Volker A. Greimann General Counsel and Policy Manager KEY-SYSTEMS GMBH T: +49 6894 9396901 M: +49 6894 9396851 F: +49 6894 9396851 W: www.key-systems.net<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.key-sys...> Key-Systems GmbH is a company registered at the local court of Saarbruecken, Germany with the registration no. HR B 18835 CEO: Oliver Fries and Robert Birkner Part of the CentralNic Group PLC (LON: CNIC) a company registered in England and Wales with company number 8576358. This email and any files transmitted are confidential and intended only for the person(s) directly addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, transmission, distribution, or other forms of dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete this email with any files that may be attached. On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 8:02 AM Alan Greenberg via Gnso-epdp-team <gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> > wrote: There continues to be discussion regarding using the SSAD as a means of "publishing" non-personal data. I believe that this discussion is a distraction that takes focus from what we should be working on. I say this for the following reason. 1. The SSAD does not exist, it may never exist, and if the Board does approve it, it will likely take several years to implement (remember we are 2 years into the implementation of Phase 1, and there is no centralized hardware/software to design and implement for that). 2. Although we specified that anyone may be accredited, it is not at all clear the amount of time it will take, nor what fee might be charged. And unless the system allows accreditation without authenticating the identity, this precludes anonymous queries. 3. We specified that the SSAD must be self-funding and that the users must pay for its operating costs. Are those in favour of using the SSAD for public data publishing proposing fees for such requests, or no fees, and if the latter, who will pay for this usage? 4. There are multiple details of Phase 2 Recommendation 8 for Contracted Party Authorization that simply make no sense in this case, yet are part of the approved policy. And changing that policy requires a PDP. 5. There does not seem to be any benefit of routing public-data requests through the SSAD with its myriad rules, regulations and processes when a vanilla RDAP server will suffice. Alan _______________________________________________ Gnso-epdp-team mailing list Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org<mailto:Gnso-epdp-team@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-epdp-team<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-epdp-team&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7Ce5d6f18a93be47eda8bf08d90599f71f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637546981101471212%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=6P%2FWq1IaM8leFLpSzSFDz73eOc2RUz7lRyHoPVg0qqo%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7Ce5d6f18a93be47eda8bf08d90599f71f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637546981101471212%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=5ELEqoQhu%2FTKpFc79mfF2cRaqCS8Bb9Sm0rLLI2%2B1SQ%3D&reserved=0>) and the website Terms of Service ( https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=04%7C01%7Cmarksv%40microsoft.com%7Ce5d6f18a93be47eda8bf08d90599f71f%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637546981101481170%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=eqRwN2V%2Frfy6N%2Fi7gDv2orOr4yU4LVtP6IXSiAXuemQ%3D&reserved=0>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.