August 2014 - Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

Draft template for F-1
by Mary Wong Aug. 11, 2014

Aug. 11, 2014

Dear WG members, As listed on the proposed agenda for the next call (below), please find attached the initial draft template for Charter Question F-1. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014 at 2:26 PM To: "gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org" <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org> Subject: Agenda and Notes for WG Call on 12 August (plus summary of ongoing discussions) > Dear WG members, > > Here is the proposed agenda for the next WG call on Tuesday 12 August 2014; > please also note the additional notes below: > > 1. Roll Call/Updates to SOI > 2. Commence discussions on Charter Question E-2 (based on draft template of 16 > July 2014) > 3. [if time permits] Discuss remaining issues from E-1 (based on summary > document circulated on 8 August 2014) > 4. [if time permits] Commence discussions on F-1 (template to be circulated) > 5. Next steps > ADDITIONAL NOTES: > * Because WG deliberations on E-1 may affect conclusions on E-1, the WG Chairs > would like to proceed with the E-2 discussions on our next call. > * Please continue to send comments and thoughts on E-1 (summary document > attached here for your convenience) to the mailing list, to supplement the > oral discussions we¹ve had so far and going into the next meeting. > * For your added convenience, please find below the language from > Specification 3 of the PIC for the New gTLD Registry Agreement, and the GAC¹s > recommended safeguards from its Beijing Communique, which this WG agreed in > its preliminary conclusions on D-4 could be a starting point for what > constitutes³malicious conduct². As noted previously, these may be helpful to > ongoing discussions of ³illegal activity² and ³abuse in Category E: > (1) Safeguard 2, Annex 1 of the GAC¹s Beijing Communique (April 2013) states > that ³Registry operators will ensure that terms of use for registrants include > prohibitions against the distribution of malware, operation of botnets, > phishing, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive > practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to > applicable law.² > (2) Section 3 of the Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specification in the > New gTLD Registry Agreement states that: ³Registry Operator will include a > provision in its Registry-Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to > include in their Registration Agreements a provision prohibiting Registered > Name Holders from distributing malware, abusively operating botnets, phishing, > piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive > practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to > applicable law, and providing (consistent with applicable law and any related > procedures) consequences for such activities including suspension of the > domain name.² > > Thanks and cheers > Mary > > Mary Wong > Senior Policy Director > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) > Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 > Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org > > > >

1 0

Agenda and Notes for WG Call on 12 August (plus summary of ongoing discussions)
by Mary Wong Aug. 11, 2014

Aug. 11, 2014

Dear WG members, Here is the proposed agenda for the next WG call on Tuesday 12 August 2014; please also note the additional notes below: 1. Roll Call/Updates to SOI 2. Commence discussions on Charter Question E-2 (based on draft template of 16 July 2014) 3. [if time permits] Discuss remaining issues from E-1 (based on summary document circulated on 8 August 2014) 4. [if time permits] Commence discussions on F-1 (template to be circulated) 5. Next steps ADDITIONAL NOTES: * Because WG deliberations on E-1 may affect conclusions on E-1, the WG Chairs would like to proceed with the E-2 discussions on our next call. * Please continue to send comments and thoughts on E-1 (summary document attached here for your convenience) to the mailing list, to supplement the oral discussions we¹ve had so far and going into the next meeting. * For your added convenience, please find below the language from Specification 3 of the PIC for the New gTLD Registry Agreement, and the GAC¹s recommended safeguards from its Beijing Communique, which this WG agreed in its preliminary conclusions on D-4 could be a starting point for what constitutes³malicious conduct². As noted previously, these may be helpful to ongoing discussions of ³illegal activity² and ³abuse in Category E: (1) Safeguard 2, Annex 1 of the GAC¹s Beijing Communique (April 2013) states that ³Registry operators will ensure that terms of use for registrants include prohibitions against the distribution of malware, operation of botnets, phishing, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to applicable law.² (2) Section 3 of the Public Interest Commitments (PIC) Specification in the New gTLD Registry Agreement states that: ³Registry Operator will include a provision in its Registry-Registrar Agreement that requires Registrars to include in their Registration Agreements a provision prohibiting Registered Name Holders from distributing malware, abusively operating botnets, phishing, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to applicable law, and providing (consistent with applicable law and any related procedures) consequences for such activities including suspension of the domain name.² Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org

1 0

Summary for Discussion: Charter Question E-1
by Mary Wong Aug. 8, 2014

Aug. 8, 2014

Dear WG members, As noted on the Tuesday call, staff (in consultation with the WG Chairs) has prepared the attached document for your review and further discussion, in the hope that the WG will be in a position to finalize preliminary conclusions on Charter Question E-1 by next week. Please share your comments on this mailing list prior to the call this coming Tuesday so that we may continue discussions going into that meeting. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org

1 0

Outcome of the PPSAI Meeting?
by Holly Raiche Aug. 5, 2014

Aug. 5, 2014

Hi Everyone I had had to miss the meeting before this one just passed, but I had thought we had arrived at agreement that: P/P providers would forward what was called Category 1 - abuse, etc and Category 2 - anything required under the RAA. Anything after than will be a commercial decision of the P/P provider based on what they can do and what their customers want. Indeed, they can differentiate themselves from other providers as a service to customers by offering a tailored service, based on customer preference over and above how Categories 1 and 2 are handled. And on relaying bounced messages. I think we were saying that, in the case of some providers, they actually forward the email and so would know if it bounced - in which case, I think we are arguing over whether the provider - when they become aware of a bounce - should let the message originator know of the bounce. Clearly, for those providers who would not know whether the message bounced, we could not require them to pass on knowledge they do not have. In all cases, the P/P provider should fully inform customers of how messages from a message originator to the P/P customer are handled. Last night (for me) call left me wondering if that is where we are up to. So am I right, and if not, what is still not pretty much agreed on? HOlly

2 1

MP3 PPSAI WG - Tuesday 05 August 2014 at 1400 UTC
by Terri Agnew Aug. 5, 2014

Aug. 5, 2014

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Privacy and Proxy Services Accreditation Issues PDP Working group call held on Tuesday 05 August 2014 at 14:00 UTC at: <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140805-en.mp3> http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ppsa-20140805-en.mp3 On page: <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug> http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#aug The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/> http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/ Attendees: Steve Metalitz - IPC Justin Macy – BC Sarah Wyld - RrSG Chris Pelling – RrSG Darcy Southwell - RrSG Graeme Bunton – RrSG Val Sherman – IPC Griffin Barnett – IPC Susan Kawaguchi – BC Kathy Kleiman – NCUC Todd Williams – IPC Michele Neylon – RrSG Tatiana Khramtsova – RrSG Frank Michlick – Individual Luc Seufer- RrSG Volker Greimann-RrSG Don Blumenthal – RySG Osvaldo Novoa – ISPCP Libby Baney-BC David Hughes-IPC Holly Raiche – ALAC Kristina Rosette – IPC David Heasley-IPC Dan Burke-Individual Christian Dawson-ISPCP Jim Bikoff-IPC Sean McInerney-SOI Apologies: Stephanie Perrin – NCSG Alex Deacon – IPC Paul McGrady – IPC Carlton Samuels – ALAC Roy Balleste – NCUC ICANN staff: Mary Wong Marika Konings Amy Bivins Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/> http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: <https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg> https://community.icann.org/x/9iCfAg Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday 05 August 2014: Terri Agnew:Welcome to the PPSAI WG Meeting on 05 August 2014 Chris Pelling:afternoon all :) Luc Seufer:Hi Chris Graeme Bunton:Good morning all Christian Dawson:Good mornig Michele Neylon:wow Christian Dawson::) Chris Pelling:@Don, please do not take this as rudeness, but can you turn your MIC down ? Terri Agnew:Frank Michlick and Volker Greimann has joined Holly Raiche:fine by me Volker Greimann:Apologies, I am delayed on another call, will join this one in a few minutes Terri Agnew:Osvaldo Novoa has joined Terri Agnew:Thank you for the information Volker Chris Pelling:@Luc 'ello Darcy Southwell:My audio isn't working ... Darcy Southwell:I'll come back Terri Agnew:David Hughes has joined audio Terri Agnew:Kristina Rosette has joined Kristina Rosette:Apologies for being late Luc Seufer:Sorry guys, but could we take a step back and address the root issue that mail servers can be silent and there is no obligation for a registrant to have his email address setup in a way it will send bounce/error messages? Luc Seufer:exactly, you don't necessarily got a bounce back with "regular "registration Mary Wong:@Luc I believe the current recommendation is to notify only when provider knows of actual failure (ie something similar to the "knowingly" standard in the RAA, albeit for a different situation) Graeme Bunton:This is where I think we're a bit stuck, thanks Michele Graeme Bunton:We're also leaving it more open than email. Could be form, captcha etc Mary Wong:@Graeme, that's the current state of discussion, yes Luc Seufer:@Mary thanks that's what the recommendation is saying but not what I am hearing on the call Chris Pelling:@Steve - NOT all servers comply with RFC on bounce's Chris Pelling:for example RFC3463 steve metalitz:@Darcy it is not an either/or. Investigate AND notify requester. Chris Pelling:Sorry but are we missing the underlying server HAS to provide the bounce back in the first palce Chris Pelling:*place Mary Wong:@Darcy, there's currently a prelim conclusion for Charter question B-2 that concerns provider obligation to verify for accuracy Darcy Southwell:Thanks, Mary. Graeme Bunton:thanks Steve. Kathy:What's the minimum baseline? What are the choices for p/p providers? Libby Baney:Trying to define the world of possible "abuse case" messages strikes me as cumbersome and open to inconsistent interpretation Kathy:Quick note: the question is phrased: What, if any, are the baseline minimum standardized relay process... be adopted by p/p providers.. Holly Raiche:@Kathy - I think that is the baselline Kathy:@Holly, and I think your summary was a good one! Kathy:yes Luc Seufer:ICANN policy email as an example Luc Seufer:the verification emails sent under 2013 RAA Luc Seufer:etc. Susan Kawaguchi:There is many types of emails that should be relayed. I do not understand why a proxy registration should be treated any different than a "regular" registration Luc Seufer:I totally agree with you Susan Kathy:@Susan: we've had long conversations regarding abuse, definitions of abuse, and the types of abuse messages that must be forwarded. Kathy:(Relayed really) Kathy:So now the idea of forwarding everything... interesting implications Susan Kawaguchi:Proxy does not equal spam filters Kathy:@Steve, shouldn't there be a choice? Luc Seufer:@Kathy forwarding doesn't prevent you from applying an anti-spam filter Susan Kawaguchi:as a domain name registrant I have a responsibility to have a functioing email address Luc Seufer:just like for "regular" registration Susan Kawaguchi:I agree Luc Graeme Bunton:digging into some notes, for a sec Mary Wong:@Luc, that is correct - even for a "forward all" obligation, providers should be able to filter or apply "commercially reasonable Mary Wong:safeguards Luc Seufer:Mary I am not speaking of the P/P provider, the RNH/user can use the filter that they chose to Mary Wong:Ah, ok, thx Luc Seufer:but this FW obligation should be on a best efforts basis Luc Seufer:there is no guarantee those emails will be read by the user steve metalitz:@Kathy or others: Could someone propose a list of the categories of notices that must be forwarded? Mary Wong:@Kathy @Susan would the "commercially reasonable" language cover this situation? Chris Pelling:We do - as its a three factor auth to get an email to the registrant/tech or nilling contact Kathy:@Mary: I don't think so -- because "commercially reasonable" forarding of "all emails" (which I think is what you are suggesting) is far different that "allegations of illegal activities" which is what the question asks us Mary Wong:@Kathy, yes, this is where E-1 elides into E-2 steve metalitz:@Chris so we now have one provider vote for the additive approach. Others? Kathy:@Mary: so the standard would be "commercially reasonable" standard for forwarding allegations of illegal activities...? Sounds OK if that's the case. Susan Kawaguchi:@ Michele I agree we shouldn't limit what services the proxy service provides but I don't think we should set the baseline at that granular level Michele Neylon:Susan - I don't think we should set silly limits Terri Agnew:Sean McInerney has joined audio Mary Wong:@Kathy, for E-1 "commercially reasonable efforts to relay" is one option; if that is the preferred option, then the implications on E-2 (on screen now) will need to be addressed (or so I understand the discussion) Chris Pelling:can I reply to this please Kathy:sure! steve metalitz:+1 Susan, a no-forward policy cannot be allowed. We discussed this in detail several weeks ago. steve metalitz:.cat obtained a waiver from RAA Whois requirements Michele Neylon:yes they did Michele Neylon:kudos to them Chris Pelling:Graeme ? Mary Wong:We may have some AC audio issues Graeme Bunton:i don't think it's actually kathy live Graeme Bunton:sounds like its the recording malfunctioning Volker Greimann:i can wait Luc Seufer:this AC is haunted Terri Agnew:It appears our AC audio has stopped working iwth Audio, I will reconnect it Volker Greimann:I cannot hear steve very well, btw Don Blumenthal:Am I coming through? Graeme Bunton:not at the moment Mary Wong:Apparently a problem only with those purely on AC mic and audio, so if you are on phone bridge you should be fine. Luc Seufer:yes Don, you and ghost Steve Kathy:no Don Graeme Bunton:Well, that's an unfortunate way to end the call Terri Agnew:one moment will re establish Adobe line Don Blumenthal:I just got a notice that AC dropped audio Don Blumenthal:Can't get back in Volker Greimann:time is out anyway Terri Agnew:Adobe connect has been re estalbished Graeme Bunton:Yes please, thank you Mary Luc Seufer:bye Darcy Southwell:Thanks, bye.

1 0

The point I was trying to make when the audio failed...
by Volker Greimann Aug. 5, 2014

Aug. 5, 2014

Hello everyone, as I was saying when Adobe went freaky, I do not believe there should be a requirement for automated forwarding of mail, provided the privacy service offers a means to be contacted for complaints. On the other hand, there does not need to be a requirement for privacy services to centrally receive complaints if they can ensure the direct contactability of the registrant. So basically as long as there is some means to reach the registrant, whether directly or indirectly, that should be sufficient. We do not need to prescribe a way as long as there is a way. -- Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Volker A. Greimann - Rechtsabteilung - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen. -------------------------------------------- Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Volker A. Greimann - legal department - Key-Systems GmbH Im Oberen Werk 1 66386 St. Ingbert Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901 Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851 Email: vgreimann(a)key-systems.net Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated: www.facebook.com/KeySystems www.twitter.com/key_systems CEO: Alexander Siffrin Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534 Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP www.keydrive.lu This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.

1 0

Question
by Kathy Kleiman Aug. 5, 2014

Aug. 5, 2014

Hi Steve and Alex, Good discussion today - much appreciated. Quick note: I can certainly understand the desire to know if an email went through. Quick question: do you have any idea how many "bouncebacks" we are talking about? In today's environment, with the current forwarding work by proxy/privacy providers, do you have any idea how many messages are undeliverable vs. how many may be received but not responded to? I know each messages is important, but are we talking about a high percentage or a very low percentage? Tx, Kathy

10 12

REMINDER: PLEASE RSVP Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session
by Nathalie Peregrine Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Reminder: Monthly GNSO WG Newcomer Open House Session These ongoing monthly sessions are for new GNSO WG participants to come together and discuss any questions they may have about GNSO Working Groups, procedures and/or processes. We know there is a lot of information to digest when you join a GNSO Working Group and these monthly meetings are an opportunity for newcomers and more experienced participants to meet in an informal setting without the pressure of "real work" that needs be done. The agenda is flexible. The presenters will be ready with a standard set of materials if people would like to discuss them. Feel free to submit questions, either in advance or at the beginning of the meeting, if there is a topic that you would like to explore in more depth . Providing useful answers to a wide range of questions is part of the reason why these meetings are Thursday 7 August at 12.00 UTC Thursday 4 September at 20.00 UTC Thursday 2 October at 12.00 UTC Thursday 6 November at 20.00 UTC Thursday 4 December at 12.00 UTC To convert to your local time zone, please see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html If you are interested to join the next meeting on 7 August or any of the future meetings, please let the GNSO Secretariat know ( <mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> gnso-secs(a)icann.org) and we will send you the call details. If there are any specific questions you already have, or any overviews or introductions you think would be helpful (e.g. GNSO Policy Development Process or GNSO Working Group guidelines), please let us know in advance and we will prepare materials accordingly. Feel free to share this invitation with others that you think may be interested. We look forward to welcoming you at the next meeting! Nathalie Peregrine GNSO Secretariat

1 0

Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Agenda for WG call on 5 August 2014
by Don Blumenthal Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Thanks, Mary. To all, our timetable has slipped a bit. We would like to avoid that happening. Also, as I suggested earlier today, the slippage may be partly because we are focusing on details that are beyond the WG’s scope. We will focus our E-1 discussion tomorrow on 1) should providers be required to notify requestors of delivery failures and 2) what kinds of relay requests must be forwarded? All? All that are possible given reasonable commercial standards (check the template for a more eloquent statement of that position :) )? Only items from specific classes of requestors? We expect to move to E2 30 minutes into the call at the latest, maybe earlier if it starts to look like E2 discussion will enlighten the second E1 topic. Talk to you tomorrow morning. Don From: Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>> Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 at 9:53 AM To: PPSAI <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org>> Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Agenda for WG call on 5 August 2014 Dear WG members, Here is the proposed agenda for the next WG call on 5 August: 1. Roll call/Updates to SOI 2. Finalize preliminary conclusions on E-1 (updated version circulated on 1 August) 3. Commence deliberations on E-2 (attached) 4. Next steps/next meeting Both draft templates will also be uploaded into the wiki and made available in the AC room for the meeting. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>

2 1

Agenda for WG call on 5 August 2014
by Mary Wong Aug. 4, 2014

Aug. 4, 2014

Dear WG members, Here is the proposed agenda for the next WG call on 5 August: 1. Roll call/Updates to SOI 2. Finalize preliminary conclusions on E-1 (updated version circulated on 1 August) 3. Commence deliberations on E-2 (attached) 4. Next steps/next meeting Both draft templates will also be uploaded into the wiki and made available in the AC room for the meeting. Thanks and cheers Mary Mary Wong Senior Policy Director Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) Telephone: +1 603 574 4892 Email: mary.wong(a)icann.org

1 0