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, 06 September 2016 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-06sep16-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/JBmsAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ------------------------------- Adobe Connect chat transcript for Tuesday, 06 September 2016 Michelle DeSmyter:Dear All, Welcome to the Next-Gen RDS PDP WG Meeting on Tuesday, 06 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/JBmsAw VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:10 & counting :-) Chuck Gomes:Hello all. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) Alex Deacon:Helllo all... Greg Shatan:Hello all. I will need to leave at the bottom of the hour due to a conflicting ICANN-related meeting. Ayden Férdeline:hi all Michele Neylon:afternoon all Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hi All Volker Greimann:Purpose != what it is being used for Volker Greimann:? Greg Mounier 2:Having issues with audio... steve metalitz:Who are members of the Board team? Marika Konings:@ Steve - see https://features.icann.org/composition-and-scope-board-working-group-registr... Marika Konings:he Board hereby names the following Board members to serve on the BWG-RDS: Steve Crocker, Bruce Tonkin, Erika Mann, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Markus Kummer, Cherine Chalaby, and Chris Disspain. The Board also names an ex-officio role on the BWG-RDS for ICANN's CEO, however that role will not become operative until the next ICANN CEO takes office. Volker Greimann:does not? Volker Greimann:that's what I thought, Chuck, thanks for making that clear Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 chuck - a use today does not mean it that is the purpose of registration data going forward. Lisa Phifer:sac055 link https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-055-en.pdf Volker Greimann:the definition of purpose is paramount to the legality of the collection of data Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 steve - an important point the SSAC report brings up is that if there are different purposes we should not constraing ourselves to a single method of access (currently the role that RDAP serves in "loose" conversation) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is just the tool, and it is hard to deny that people will use it in unimaginable ways ... Kal Feher:that doesnt really read like a purpose to be honest. there arent any reasons in there. just statements of functions Roger Carney:+1 Jim Lisa Phifer:How specifically does registration data support ICANN's missuon t ensure the security and stability of the uniique identiier system? Kal Feher:security of the internet is a goal. a purpose statement should give us the reason why certain things tangientially connect to that goal. this purpose does not tell me why RDS should exist Lisa Phifer:+1 jim Volker Greimann:give the statement again? Volker Greimann:useful, maybe. Necessary, no! Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):promotion is usually about marketing .. tech things might not intersect with that field Greg Shatan:Is somebody someplace windy or on a train? Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - some short bullets: regarding stability: from the business side you need to know who to continue the relationship - this includes all kinds of things not just money, consider transfers. Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - regarding security - you need to know who if you want to track down malefactors Greg Shatan:Maxim, promote is not being used in the "marketing" sense here. I believe this phrasing reflects a similar use in the Bylaws and/or Affirmation of Commitments. Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - all of this is entirely independent of the mechanism, viz RDAP, and expressly independent of who gets access and when (i.e., public access) Michele Neylon:+1 Greg Michele Neylon:on the "promote" bit anyway Kal Feher:I'm disagreeing because that statement is not a purpose Jim Galvin (Afilias):@kal - agree it is not a purpose, per se, but it is pretty close in my view Klaus Stoll:Sorry, audio problems Klaus Stoll:move on Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Greg, I meant that it was not used in tech meaning , more about behavioural patterns of parties Lisa Phifer:bulllets ere untended to describe how registratio data supported stated mission and purpose Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Could we add ? to the end? Lisa Phifer:(as I reco;;ect the EWG discussion) Kal Feher:@jim. actually I feel the whole statement is a long way from being a purpose. a prupose statement should be giving us reasons for the existance of this system. there's no link between this system and the goals Jim Galvin (Afilias):@maxim - I agree with your point, as I think about it. privacy is a second order issue. with the purpose we can define what we need and then we have to overlay on top of that privacy concerns Lisa Phifer:does anyone have an example of a well foormed statement of purpose that would be helpfuk to illustrate what this WG should aim for? Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - here's what I like to say Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - the purpose of registration data is to support the life cycle of a domain name. Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - everything else is a secondary purpose. :-) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):the last bullet itself is controversial Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):which one is appropriate in which case? Volker Greimann:not on phone line Volker Greimann:sorry Volker Greimann:aw enforcement can contact service provider directly. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is better to use"ensure ongoing effort to provide ..." Volker Greimann:no need to put that information out there. similar to telephone lines or hosting services where there is no such database but law enforcement can do their job Volker Greimann:can still do their job steve metalitz:@Volker, not sure hos "contacting service provider" is inecessarily inconsistent with the final bullet. steve metalitz:how.... necessarily... Volker Greimann:we are talking about if that purpose is desirable. Volker Greimann:I am not certain it is desirable, or even necessary for this purpose Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):also they need more than RDS :) Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 chuck - the bullets are more requirements than a purpose Jim Galvin (Afilias):to the extent they are requirements, the details are negotiable and thus may not be achievable Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):vendors usually tend to evaluate via additional income instead of number of issues Susan kawaguchi:@Michele name those registries Chuck Gomes:Please remove your check marks and x's Susan kawaguchi:there are very few that do not provide information Alan Greenberg:@Michele, I will do my nonest best to say something so outrageous you will find it easy to disagree. Sara Bockey:I believe .UK has a very narrow WHOIS published Alan Greenberg:nonest=honest VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Sara .UK puts the Onus on the Rgistrars Volker Greimann:can LEAs use it? sure, is their use the purpose of it? no! is it a legitimate purpose for the collection in a legal sense? No! Sara Bockey:Gotcha Vaibhav Volker Greimann:VA: Actually, Nominet handles these directly. Alan Greenberg:It seems rather masochistic for a registry to insis that they have to handle requests for information on a pure 1 by 1 basis. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):goals? Nathalie Coupet:I believe hte purpose of an RDS depends on who you ask. Ebd-users might have a different take on this. Michele Neylon:Sara - Nominet - IEDR - AFNIC all have quite limited whois Nathalie Coupet:End-users Michele Neylon:depending on how the registrant has classed themselves Michele Neylon:in the case of .ie you'll often only get a name Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):cctlds are free to do what they like ...for example .to ccTLD :) Michele Neylon:so if it's patrick murphy good luck finding them :) Michele Neylon:Obviously the registrar + registry have more data VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Michele That is what I was just sharing with #Sara that Registries like Nominet have a Automated Feild Verfication System, use the eg. of .TEL and put the onus of the who is info on the Registrars Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):also even RDS does not resolve issue when the legal company is hired to make registrstions and to provide additional services(so it is not regulated by p&P) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:so Incase the data is incomplete or not right then the regisrar is to be contacted Michele Neylon:Vaibhav - their automated validation system doesn't work Michele Neylon:it's horrendous Benny Samuelsen / Nordreg AB:+1 Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 Volker Greimann:remember: If we end up with a purpose statement that does not satisfy the requirements of data protection laws, we may end up with a situation where we build a system that is unworkable since it has a built-in conflict Michele Neylon:my sales staff are currently working through several thousand *.uk registrations to manually validate them for nominet Michele Neylon:and it's wrecking their heads (and my bottom line) Michele Neylon:+1 Volker Jim Galvin (Afilias):@chuck - I can take the proposal one step further too Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):RDS reflects the lifecycle Nathalie Coupet:Chuck, does that mean whois, whowas services and what else? steve metalitz:could support jJim'as formulation as "a" purpose but not the sole purpose. It is necessary but not sufficient. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@MN I agree Greg Shatan:It all depends on what we mean by "the lifecycle of a domain name." VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:but just to share the Purpose steve metalitz:Jim's formulation VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:I was about to loose two .Uk ones I saved :-) Jim Galvin (Afilias):@greg - yes and hence my suggestion to take it one step further .... Greg Shatan:It's an element but it lacks clarity and specificity. Michele Neylon:Vaibhav - the argument we had with them was around "harm" ie. how many complaints had they got about domains associated with us Michele Neylon:the total was ZERO Kal Feher:to take it a little further Jim, the RDS supports the lifecycle by collecting relevent data for each lifecycle event. that data is defined by existing policies for those events. for example IRTP, renewals etc. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) Jim Galvin (Afilias):@greg - I suspect that any purpose we could all agree too will be just vague enough to need a series of bullets to explain it. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):it is not handled, just reflected Jim Galvin (Afilias):@kal - yes, we collect data based on policy for the events we agree are in the lifecycle Greg Shatan:The little black book would be a failure as an RDS. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Susan not just that - If I want to have a FB verified Account / Page then My whois is verified too VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:So Its Customer Facing too Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):do we think that different expiry dates from registrars and registries are not going to survive RDAP profile stage ? Susan kawaguchi:@ VA agree my example was just one of many uses VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@SK :-) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Just the Importance from a Policy as well as the Business Case Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Directory will have issues with single instance and localisation issues Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):latter is from legal side Susan kawaguchi:I do! online information is critical VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:I agree to RDDS VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-) Susan kawaguchi:@Jim agree with the discussion disagree with your point that I can use anything other than verifying online in an emergency situation the status of my domain name. Lots of war stories to share Volker Greimann:I for one would appreciate a fully thought out and 100% legal (no gray areas) system for a change Kal Feher:@susan, not to be too pedantic, but the only check that matters with regards to your control of your domains is DNS. either your names are delegated to you or they arent. if you are using whois to answwer that question, you arent guaranteed to get the correct answer Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):@Volker, legal requirements viary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction , so it will require segmented tool Volker Greimann:Susan: if there is only one mechanism to achieve something good, but using that mechanism has legal issues, that mechanism has a problem. Volker Greimann:maybe a different mechanism must be developed Michele Neylon:Kal - that's not true either. If I was hijacking your domain(s) I'd leave the DNS alone until the last minute Nathalie Coupet:Won't IOT also require fast, bulk, daily Whois searches? Michele Neylon:Nathalie - for what?? Volker Greimann:it is not our job to provide a service for every possible and useful use. Kal Feher:@michele, if you hijacked the domain, I doubt you'd update whois first. there's no gain there Michele Neylon:Kal - sorry, but most hijackers do .. Nathalie Coupet:If devices are DDOSing your network, are faulty or any other type of technical pbs? Michele Neylon:Nathalie - we look at the IPs not domains Michele Neylon:Network = IP address Michele Neylon:I don't really care about your domains Michele Neylon:well I do, but not that much Jim Galvin (Afilias):@susan - I do not dispute what works for you today. I believe we agree there needs to be discussion about whether to continue to support that use case going forward and, if so, what is the best mechanism for that (i.e., RDAP/WHOIS may not be it). Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):or we might leave some needs outside this time Susan kawaguchi:@ Jim agree to the discussion but please do not discount other uses of the registration information because there may be another way we can do it. Greg Shatan:@Jim, this is not jsut what works for Susan, it's what works for many many domain name owners/managers. And it's a critical use. steve metalitz:"self-evident" may not be useful concept, depends on the self involved...... Kal Feher:@michele maybe. but at registries we tend to see quick dns hijacking for immediate gain. whois tends to be the long play and would be more applicable to dispute resolution processes. Jim Galvin (Afilias):but then that means it's not self-evident. :-) VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Jim The WHOIS is the way for the time being till we dont do Brainstroming on the New System and till such time we should improve the Whois as I dont see the new system coming up that quickly anytime soon VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:@Susan is right on the importance of the matter Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):registry suports the lifecycle , I think RDS reflects the state of the domain Greg Shatan:DNS is really a different set of records, useful for different (though probably overlapping) purposes.. Susan kawaguchi:@Kal I don't agree Greg Shatan:If we're going to use a cramped definition of lifestyle, I can't support a statement that includes "lifecycle.." VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:DNS cannot be Mixed with the RDS topic Fabricio Vayra:thanks, all Greg Shatan:lifestyle = lifecycle. VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:it is a separate whole lot of it Kal Feher:@greg. DNS is your name. everything else is stuff about your name Sara Bockey:thanks all! Susan kawaguchi:and very critical Nathalie Coupet:thank you! Greg Shatan:I know what DNS is, that's not the issue. But thanks. Vlad Dinculescu:Thanks all. Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Lets keep the entire Discussion focused and Simple VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:From a perspective that we can make anything but will it be easy from the USer perspective VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:so Users of the RDS is a Very Imotant Stake Holder VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:hanks Guys VAIBHAV AGGARWAL:Have a Good Rest week VAIBHAV AGGARWAL::-)