Interesting comments Volker! I guess it's all about the perspective you view it from I suppose. The impact of bad data on law enforcement investigations can also be waste of valuable time and cost. Except the cost comes out of of the public purse...

Nick Shorey BA(Hons) MSc.
Senior Policy Advisor | Global Internet Governance
Department for Culture, Media & Sport
HM Government | United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)7710 025 626
Skype: nick.shorey
Twitter: @nickshorey

On 6 October 2016 at 17:23, Volker Greimann <vgreimann@key-systems.net> wrote:

Hi Greg,

Arguments to the contrary tend to look like a Defense of Bad Data.  I can't think of any reasons to defend bad data, unless one wants a bad database.
If you want reasons, here are a few:
1) Cost
2) Waste of valuable time
3) Implementation nightmares
4) No actual standard that applies worldwide
5) Legacy data from legacy sources
6) Customer service nightmare
It's reasonable to strive for perfectly accurate data, but accept that one will never get there.  There should be commercially reasonable and proportionate methods to get as close as practically possible.
One can strive for anything, but it may never be achieved, consuming valuable ressources on the way. How many people died trying to reach the south pole, the north pole, the peak of the Matterhorn, before someone made it. While that first one to make is famous now, consider the loss of life and ressources wasted we spent getting there.
We have not (in this group) discussed data migration, but assuming a Garbage In, Garbage Out approach doesn't seem reasonable.  Whether all the data is validated before migration, or just validated as part of a normal validation cycle, it needs be validated.
Existing data in is the only feasible solution if you want a manageable transition process.
As for validation by the road, before designing a process we should define who is going to have to implement it, process it, deal with user complaints, pay for it, etc. What is better data worth to those who have to pay for it? Are those that benefit from better data going to finance it (including all associated costs)? If so, let's talk....

Best,
Volker



On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
+1.

Not to make too fine a point of it. But the EWG was tasked to re-imagine an RDS.  If this PDP is tasked to build on the works of EWG maybe it'd be useful to re-visit certain ideas we now hold as verities.

-Carlton 


==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net> wrote:
Folks

Maybe we need to back up a bit and go back to the Charter and what we are supposed to be doing.  Let me quote directly from it:

First - background: Quoting the Charter on the Board decision to launch this PDP:

On 26 May, 2015, the ICANN Board passed a resolution adopting that Process Framework and reaffirming its 2012 request for a Board - initiated PDP to define the purpose of collecting, maintaining and providing access to gTLD registration data, and to consider safeguards for protecting data, using the recommendations in the EWG’s Final Report as an input to, and, if appropriate, as the foundation for a new gTLD policy

Later - what The Charter tasked this Working Group with:

As part of its Phase 1 deliberations, the PDP WG should work to reach consensus recommendations by considering, at a minimum, the following complex and inter-related questions:
 Users/Purposes: Who should have access to gTLD registration data and why?
 Gated Access: What steps should be taken to control data access for each user/purpose?
 Data Accuracy: What steps should be taken to improve data accuracy?
 Data Elements: What data should be collected, stored, and disclosed?
 Privacy: What steps are needed to protect data and privacy?
 Coexistence: What steps should be taken to enable next-generation RDS coexistence with and replacement of the legacy WHOIS system?
Compliance: What steps are needed to enforce these policies?
 System Model:What system requirements must be satisfied by any next-generation RDS implementation?
 Cost: What costs will be incurred and how must they be covered?
 Benefits: What benefits will be achieved and how will they be measured?
 Risks: What risks do stakeholders face and how will they be reconciled?

So accuracy’s there - along with a lot of other issues. That is not saying that accuracy is not covered in existing requirements on registries/registrars.  But it is giving a broader meaning to RDS - i.e., it’s not just about collection, maintenance and access to data; it’s also about safeguards, etc - using the EWG work.

So thanks Rob.  It’s a bit premature to rule issues out when they are well and truly on our table.

Holly


On 6 Oct 2016, at 6:37 am, Rod Rasmussen <rrasmussen@infoblox.com> wrote:

Folks,

Gotta chime in here, since the EWG provided a lot of thinking on this issue. If you haven’t already, please review the EWG report sections on data accuracy and also the concept of data validators and their relationship to the RDS.  For example, I would note that a well-provisioned RDS would be able to provide some sort of validation checks against existing data in the use case of trying to prevent impersonation (a form of accuracy) of an existing registrant (a big brand like Facebook for instance).  Another concept we found very important in the EWG is the idea of creating a contact data set tied to a contact ID that is portable between registrars and registries.  This provides for the purpose-based contacts we talk about at great length in the report.  It also is key for addressing some of the fundamental operational issues that lead to inaccurate, out-of-date data at various registrars.  If you have a change in your contact information (a new e-mail for instance) and hold multiple roles in conjunction with many domains, you have a real challenge making updates throughout the universe of your domain names.  Using a data validator and then acting via the RDS, when you make a change to your contact info, that automatically can be reflected in all domains you are associated with and thus improve accuracy tremendously.  Those are just a couple examples of how an RDS can be involved in dealing with accuracy issues and represent many of the concepts you can address once you look beyond the current paradigm of registrar controlled contact information anchored specifically to individual domain names.  Accuracy in the “generic” system (including registries, registrars, RDS, validators, some other group we haven’t thought of yet) is definitely in-scope.  How that is done can take many forms and could have different roles played by different participants in the entire ecosystem.

Cheers,

Rod

On Oct 5, 2016, at 10:36 AM, benny@nordreg.se wrote:

But the data accuracy can’t be done in RDS, the accuracy is done on a registrar level when collecting data.
RDS shall under no circumstances alter any information received from registry / registrars and showing any different info than what is collected on that level.
 
WG can look at what accuracy they want registrars to do yes, but RDS doesn’t do anything.
 
--
Med vänliga hälsningar / Kind Regards / Med vennlig hilsen

Benny Samuelsen
Registry Manager - Domainexpert

Nordreg AB - ICANN accredited registrar
IANA-ID: 638
Phone: +46.42197080
Direct: +47.32260201
Mobile: +47.40410200
 
From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Metalitz, Steven" <met@msk.com>
Date: Wednesday, 5 October 2016 at 19:32
To: 'Marika Konings' <marika.konings@icann.org>, Volker Greimann <vgreimann@key-systems.net>, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS Statement of Purpose
 
Volker, what is the basis for your assertion that “data will be presented "as is" in this system, with no
presumption of any prior cleanup work”?
 
That statement will be true if we ultimately conclude that the current system is adequate and that we do not recommend establishment of a new RDS.  However, if we do recommend a new system, then improvements to data accuracy are very much on the table, as the charter provision quoted by Marika indicates. 
 
Steve Metalitz  
 
 
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 12:53 PM
To: Volker Greimann; gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS Statement of Purpose
 
Volker, please note that the PDP WG Charter (see https://community.icann.org/x/E4xlAw) includes the following question:
 
As part of its Phase 1 deliberations, the PDP WG should work to reach consensus recommendations by considering, at a minimum, the following complex and inter-related questions:
(…..)
·                      Data Accuracy: What steps should be taken to improve data accuracy?
(……)
 
Best regards,
 
Marika
 
 
    I would move to strike all references to data quality altogether from
    this document, e.g. "current", "accurate" etc.
    These are already required by existing policies and agreements and do
    not have to be referenced again at this point. We should focus on having
    to reflect the data as provided by the RNH at this stage, not make any
    presumptions about its quality.
    
    After all, data will be presented "as is" in this system, with no
    presumption of any prior cleanup work.
    
    Best,
    Volker
    
    >> THE purpose of the "Registration Data Service" (hereafter referred to
    >> as
    >> "RDS") is to manage authorised parties' access to information about
    >> [gTLD Domain Names, gTLD Nameservers, gTLD Registries and gTLD
    >> Registrars]
    >>
    >> Purpose 3(a/b) are possible use cases, not Purposes as such
    >>
    >> "Accurate" is definitely not a term to use if we ever expect to finish
    >>    - "Current" would be more accurate (sic) / appropriate.
    > Agreed, with one minor suggestion:
    >
    > "access to information about generic top-level domain registries, registrars, names, and name servers."
    >
    > Scott
    > _______________________________________________
    > gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
    
    -- 
    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
    
    
    Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
    
    Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
    Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
    Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
    
    Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
    
    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
    
    
    Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
    
    CEO: Alexander Siffrin
    Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
    V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
    
    Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
    
    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.
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
    
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg


_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg


_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg



_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg

-- 
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@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@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.

_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg