Dear All, Please find the attendance of the call attached to this email and the MP3 recording below for the Next-Gen RDS PDP Working group call held on Tuesday, 13 September 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-13sep16-en.mp3 <http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-06sep16-en.mp3> The recordings and transcriptions of the calls are posted on the GNSO Master Calendar page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Mailing list archives:http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/ Wiki page: https://community.icann.org/x/kRysAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday, 13 September 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Next-Gen RDS PDP WG Meeting on Tuesday, 13 September 2016 at 16:00 UTC. Michelle DeSmyter:If you wish to speak during the call, please either dial into the audio bridge and give the operator the password RDS, OR click on the telephone icon at the top of the AC room to activate your mics. Please remember to mute your phone and mics when not speaking. Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda page: https://community.icann.org/x/kRysAw Chuck Gomes:Hello everyone. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All Vicky Sheckler:hi Ayden Férdeline:hi all Elaine Pruis:good morning. statement of purpose: provide information about a domain name Klaus Stoll:Provide information that is needed to operate a domain in the DNS Vicky Sheckler:purpose is of registry data is to have a point of contact for the registrant of that domain. now we may argue why ppl need access to the identity / point of contact of the registry Stephanie Perrin:+1 Vicky Klaus Stoll:I think our remit only alows us to deal with the information to operate a domain in the DNS. Everything else might not be our concern. Stephanie Perrin:Following on what Michele has said, we need a POC to ensure the domain resolves and can be fixed when it does not Vicky Sheckler:I strongly disagree with klaus. more is required.than that. Vicky Sheckler:agree w/ Greg. Ayden Férdeline 2:in my view, we need a mechanism of contact, NOT a point of contact. Stephanie Perrin:+1 Ayden Klaus Stoll:well put Ayden Vicky Sheckler:I wouldn't say "or" - would say and Kal Feher:it should be noted that the current DN lifecycle is a combination of policies. some of those policies relate to protecting registrants from losing their domain (IRTP, RGP etc). others seek to prevent misuse of the domain (AGP). So the lifecycle serves several purposes already. it's a little too simplistic to say that the lifecycle itself should be a purpose for data collection. Fabricio Vayra:Per the white paper: "Trademark holders and domain name registrants and others should have access to searchable databases of registered domain names that provide information necessary to contact a domain name registrant when a conflict arises between a trademark holder and a domain name holder" Klaus Stoll:Who decides what is a conflict? Michele Neylon:Klaus - trademark holder Michele Neylon:or their legal representation I assume Marc Anderson:@Fabricio sorry if I missed this, but which white paper are you referencing? Fabricio Vayra:@Marc https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/white-paper-2012-02-25-en Marc Anderson:@Fabricio thank you Fabricio Vayra:Simlilar language in the green paper (that predate the white papers) Michele Neylon:from 1997? Michele Neylon:I'm trying to remember where I was in 97 Greg Shatan:These are the foundational documents of ICANN (but you know that). Stephanie Perrin:Important docs Michele, do your homework! Fabricio Vayra:@Michelle February 20, 1998 Greg Shatan:I want to know where Michele was in 1997. Michele Neylon:Greg - doesn't mean they're 100% current though Michele Neylon:Greg - In South Western Spain teaching English and working on my final year project thesis Vicky Sheckler:I thought we were going through is the purpose at least XXXX. so yes, purpose is at least life cycle, but I would argue it is more, depending upon how life cycle is defined Elaine Pruis:agree! marksv:+1 Alan Greenberg:If "life cycle" is what it normally means, I disagree. Greg's edit fixes the issue. Vicky Sheckler:agree greg's edit fixes the issue Greg Shatan:With apologies, I need to step away. Stephanie Perrin:By the way, I would like to apologize for last week.....apparently I was the noisy person on the phone (unbeknownst to me). And if you happened to hear me mutter something about a male donkey, I was referring to a fellow motorist who was weaving in and out of 4 lanes of traffic on the most complex chunk of the Montreal highway system (also one of the most elevated). He deserved worst, but apologies for unwittingly sharing my views and I hope nobody thought it referred to a speaker on the call..... Vicky Sheckler:understand what mark is saying and agree Marina Lewis:I like that edit re information on life cycle Stephanie Perrin:You are not alone Mark Marina Lewis:Mark - is the question managing versus getting info on life cycle? Elaine Pruis:a simple answer: if the domain is in redemption grace, it is no longer resolving. People use the whois to look up the status of the domain, to sort out how to get it working again. Michele Neylon:Yes, but how much do they need to refer to whois if the domain is working fine? Elaine Pruis:if someone is going to "buy" a domain, they use whois to look up the create/registrar/registrant Marina Lewis:I can see several scenarios where someone might need info on the life cycle for reasons other than managing the life cycle directly. For example, an IT person for the domain registrant might need to know the expiration date so he/she can take steps to renew the domain. That would be actively "managing" the life cycle. On the other hand, someone who wants to acquire the domain name and looks up info on the life cycle to see if the domain is coming up for renewal. That could provide insight on whether the current registrant is interested in keeping the domain or whether he/she might be interested in selling (say, if the domain had lapsed into the redemption period without renewal). In that case, the info on the life cycle is informational only and the proposed buyer does not seek to "manage" the cycle itself, but still desires useful information ABOUT the life cycle. Does that help?? Marina Lewis:(Above comment directed to Mark. :) Michele Neylon:gotta drop - have to head to an event here Michele Neylon:bye marksv:I think I am realizing that my confusion is related to "managing" and the directionality of it. One might say that marina's example isn't "managing the lifecycle", because it starts as an external activity (I am looking for a seller). I had been thinking more "abstractly", as someone said - if that external activity results in a potential buyer contacting a current owner, that activity has become a de facto form of management of the lifecycle (if we assume that taking offers and potentially agreeing to sell is a viable activity within the Registered portion of the lifecycle). Marina Lewis:Thanks, Mark - actually my scenario envisioned someone (externally) considering the life cycle info when deciding whether to pursue acquisition - so no proactive steps on the part of the potential buyer. Just info. Alex Deacon:At ICANN more often than not the meaning of words/phrases are key - especially those that make it into policy and even contracts. So when we use the phrase “domain name life cycle” we must be as exact/specific as possible as to what that means. It can't be vague, because if it is vague it will cause confusing in the future. We must all agree to the exact meaning of this (or any) word/phrase. Alex Deacon:s/confusing/confusion/ Stephanie Perrin:+1 Alex. And one of the problems is that much ICANN policy is built on undefined terms Richard Padilla:Sorry for being late microsoft decided to update my laptop today it took a while lol marksv:@Richard I did no such thing ;-) Vicky Sheckler:agree w/ Metalitz Fabricio Vayra:+1 Metalitz Elaine Pruis:it is not our remit to define lifecycle marksv:hmmm Elaine Pruis:that will be a very slippery slope Elaine Pruis:one sec Marika Konings:you may not need to define lifecycle, but you could start spelling it out by saying RDS is expected to support registration, renewal, expiration, etc. Marika Konings:so instead of defining, just call out which specific elements are expected to be part of the purpose for RDS marksv:Marika is in line with what I am suggesting Elaine Pruis:that's great Marika Vicky Sheckler:agree w/ Marika and Elaine. better to identify more clearly the tasks/purposes at in and Richard Padilla:@marksv I didn't realise that it was the new permanent version of windows 10 so I been doing it for about an hr lol Vicky Sheckler:at hand I meant. marksv:ouch marksv:@Richard you have my apologies for that Richard Padilla:@marksv thanks lol Lisa Phifer:perhaps we need an example of a statement of pupose to model our statement after - does anyone have one to recommend? Lisa Phifer:identifying, establishing contact with, and maintaining contact with... is I believe the intent of the 3rd bullet Lisa Phifer:How about 4th bullet - that seems to get more to purpose Elaine Pruis:I want the RDS purpose statement to include "provide information about a domain name" Lisa Phifer:Stephanie, when you guided the EWG to draft this statement, didn't we work from an example statement of purpose that started with a mission and indicated that the RDS was to support that mission? Fabricio Vayra:+1 Lisa Vicky Sheckler:agree w/ Lisa Richard Padilla:+1 Lisa Alan Greenberg:Certainly "A" part of the statement Elaine Pruis:how about just "support a framework to address issues involving registrants" drop the rest Fabricio Vayra:the 4th bullet is the one the most mirrors the foundational documents (green and white papers) Vicky Sheckler:those items are not extraneous. Vicky Sheckler:disagree strongly with Stephanie. Alan Greenberg:Perhaps should be ":...to address selected ussues..." or we could re-use "appropriate" Elaine Pruis:have to drop off for another meeting. cheers Fabricio Vayra:+1 Vicky. Vicky Sheckler:rds is for identification of point of contact for registrant/registrar/registry. one purpose to use that data are the items listed in the 4th bullet Marina Lewis:I disagree that registrant data is not used for law enforcement purposes, or efforts to combat cyber-crime. This is the first place I start when investigating these issues. Vicky Sheckler:sounds good chuck marksv:not opposed Vaibhav Aggarwal: +2 Marina Nathalie Coupet:@Ayden: What would the mechanism for indentifying the Registrant look like? Vaibhav Aggarwal:Vicky you gtta check your facts plese Marina Lewis:+1 Vicky Stephanie Perrin:@Lisa, our mandate was different Vicky Sheckler:sorry have to run Stephanie Perrin:re law enforcement.....data is used by law enforcement. Purpose of collecting data is not to serve law enforcement, any more than I share information with my bank in order to serve law enforcement in the event that I do something illegal. The infrastructure we set up to facilitate other purposes (law enforcement, trade mark abuse enforcement) should be separate in policy and purpose than the registration data. Stephanie Perrin:on the matter of law enforcement, see the letter from kohstamm to Crocker on that score, with reference to data retention. marksv:+1 @ Stephanie Ayden Férdeline 2:+1 Stephanie Marina Lewis:@Stephanie - you might not provide info to your bank to aid law enforcement directly, but law enforcement would absolutely get a warrant to check your bank account if necessary to investigate an alleged money laundry scheme. Not a suggestion that you should change professions, but for illustration only. ;-) marksv:Her point is the definition of "purpose" marksv:have to drop - thanks, everyone Marina Lewis:@Perhaps, but I disagree that we should set up an entirely different system for every conceivable purpose to which registration data would be put. That would be massively inefficient and would lead to redundancy and errors in the data. Marina Lewis:@Mark...Perhaps... Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):a question from one who used filters a lot Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):why do we use separate sheets Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):in the XLS Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):tabs Stephanie Perrin:I am well aware of how that works. Canada has a piece of legislation on money laundry and surveillance systems that I am very familiar with. However, that example actually makes my point....we do not try to wrap international criminal investigation into the same legislation that manages banking (Bank ACt) we create a separate agency, with oversight, procedures and as close to due process as one gets in imatters dealing with international terrorist financing. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):with unique identifiers it is possible to flag any combination of what you want to see this moment Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):consolidated tab helps Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):thus non need to change if you are going to use it Marina Lewis:@Stephanie - what I'm saying is that even if that isn't the purpose of banking information, it does serve other purposes. Nobody is going to set up a different database just to track financial information on citizens in case they might engage in illegal activity someday. Unless, of course, you support the McCarthy files from the Cold War era, which I do not. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):9 is better than 7.30:) Stephanie Perrin:I think we agree on that. The point is, we need not design a portmanteau WHOIS that holds all the data that law enforcement want (eg credit card data).. The registrars hold that data, and they should continue to hold it in my view.... Stephanie Perrin:Distributed data systems need not be complex, burdensome, not access un-validated and credentialed in 2017. Marina Lewis:The bottom line is that we can and should use registration data for this purpose. I mean, let's be real - why are we even all here? Because there are massive technical failures currently existing in the DNS? No...we're here because cybercrime and infringement and other bad acts occur on the Internet. A transparent registration database is a critical tool to fight that. I don't see why this creates such a problem for so many people. Sara Bockey:thanks all Fabricio Vayra:thanks! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all Vlad Dinculescu:Thanks all. Marina Lewis:thanks everyone! Richard Padilla:Ok all see you Nathalie Coupet:thank you!