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, 04 April 2017 at 16:00 UTC. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-nextgen-rds-pdp-04apr17-en.mp3 AC Recording: https://participate.icann.org/p644jplsn4e/ <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/sMLRAw Thank you. Kind regards, Michelle DeSmyter ——————————————— AC Chat Next-Gen RDS PDP WG Tuesday, 04 April 2017 Michelle DeSmyter:Welcome to the GNSO Next-Gen RDS PDP Working Group teleconference on Tuesday, 04 April 2017 at 16:00 UTC for 90 minutes. Michelle DeSmyter:Agenda wiki page: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_s... Chuck Gomes:Greetings to everyone. Chris Pelling:Afternoon all :) Chris Pelling:wow - feedback Michele Neylon:huh? Michele Neylon:Am I on the wrong call? Carlton Samuels:Howdy all Stephanie Perrin:Hi Carlton! Juan Manuel Rojas:Good afternoon Carlton Samuels:Hi Steph, good to see you Daniel K. Nanghaka:Hi All Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):Hello All Bastiaan Goslings:thanks for having me ;-) Theo Geurts:welcome tobrien:(waves) hello all, glad to help Chris Pelling:PLease unlock and allow zooming Chris Pelling:^^@staff Chris Pelling:ta :) Lisa Phifer:@Chris done Lisa Phifer:Annotated results being displayed now can be downloaded from https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dow... Greg Aaron:no one here is representing SSAC officially andrew sullivan:Apologies for tardiness -- my previous meeting ran long Roger Carney:+1 Chuck Lisa Phifer:proposed alternative: A purpose of RDS is to facilitate possible dissemination of gTLD registration data in accordance with applicable policy. Greg Aaron:"possible" adds nothing. Either an RDS disseminates data, or it does not. Greg Aaron:Either an RDS disseminates data, or it does not. WHAT data is as per policy. Fabricio Vayra:COMMENT: Aren't things like "accuracy", "accordance with applicable policy" etc. requirements in support of a purpose "Purpose of RDS is to support domain name registration and maintenance by providing appropriate access to registration data to enable a reliable mechanism for identifying, establishing and maintaining the ability to contact Registrants" tobrien:+1 Greg Greg Aaron:To say "possibly" is the same as saying that an RDS MIGHT display data. Fabricio Vayra:+1 Greg Fabricio Vayra:and I'd say "display" is also a possbile requirement in support of a purpose Amr Elsadr:Note that "access", whether it be public or gated is a future task for this working group to tackle as per the workplan. Greg Aaron:An RDS WILL display data. What data, and how much, is per policy to be decided. But we know that an RDS will display data, and "possibly" confuses things. Scott Hollenbeck (Verisign):I don't think I like "display". A sign displays information. An RDS returns information in response to a query. Stuart Clark:how about disemination of selected registrayion data? Vicky Sheckler:sorry i'm late Lisa Phifer:Alt D: A purpose of RDS is to provide an authoritative source of information about, for example, domaincontacts, domain names and name servers for gTLDs, [based on approved policy]. andrew sullivan:I continue to find it bizarre that we talk about the RDS in terns of collecting the data, since that's what registration systems do. We seem to be equivocating on whether we are making new registry policy or are not. I _think_ what we're saying is that the data-collection side of the RDS is the union of data in the registrar and registry databases. Is that right? Stephanie Perrin:Can you see my hand up? (once bitten with adobe problems, always shy.....) Amr Elsadr:We see it, Stephanie. andrew sullivan:@Stephanie: yes Stephanie Perrin:thanks :-) Carlton Samuels:@Scott: +1 - the RDS is an authoritative source of DNS data in that it collects, stores and ultimately disseminates that data in keeping with policy. So both purpose statements are needed Lisa Phifer:Reminder charter asks us to defined requirements and purpose of Registration Data and Directory Services in phase 1, followed by detailed policies to support those in Phase 2 Carlton Samuels:@Greg: yes, two verbs may make two statements or conjoin them Lisa Phifer:Proposed split: A purpose is to provide an authoritative source... separate from A purpose is to facilitate dissemination.... Greg Shatan:Disseminate: "to spread or disperse" Mike Hammer:provide access or make available? Carlton Samuels:'dissseminate' = spread, communicate, put out, etc. Stephanie Perrin:@Lisa yes. Michele Neylon:disseminate is active Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 michele Lisa Phifer:Here is a combined option: (1) A purpose is to provide an authoritative source... separate from (2) A purpose is to provide access to... Lisa Phifer:Note that "Access" is to be addressed by this WG per our charter David Cake:+1 Michele Jim Galvin (Afilias):@lisa - yes Carlton Samuels:@Michele: This word presumes an affirmative response to a request; the RDS is queried. Amr Elsadr:To add to Lisa, working out the details on "access" is task 12c in the updated workplan, where the nuances of public and gated "access" will be discussed. Michele Neylon:Carlton - which word? Carlton Samuels:@Michele 'disseminate' Lisa Phifer:@Carlton It doesn't say how access is provided (direct query, referral, etc, all on the table for Phase 2) Stephanie Perrin:+1 Marc Carlton Samuels:@Lisa; Very true! Michele Neylon:Carlton - no it doesn't Tim O'Brien:appologies andrew sullivan:I thought in CPH we said 'in the technical sense' or 'from an aithoritative source' or something like that for this authoritative business Michele Neylon:I'd hire a PR company to disseminate our news .. andrew sullivan:the point is that we want the authoritative data in the data-theoretic sense -- not from a cache, not from a stale source, &c &c. Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 andrew Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 chuck to poll Lisa Phifer:Note last week Lisa Phifer:call ended with an action to WG members to volunteer to define "authoritative" andrew sullivan:Let's punt Theo Geurts:agreed Andrew Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_rfc_rfc103... ? Mike Hammer:Is the sense that authoritative=source of record? Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):that RFC 1035 has some kind of definition Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):of authoritative data Carlton Samuels:@Mike: Yes, that is the sense I understand it. In context, the data is verified and verifiable Amr Elsadr:Definition of "authoritative" as per the "thick" WHOIS PDP: ""Authoritative, withrespect to provision of Whois services, shall be interpreted as to signify the single database within ahierarchical database structure holding the data that is assumed to be the final authority regardingthe question of which record shall be considered accurate and reliable in case of conflicting records;administered by a single administrative [agent] and consisting of data provided by the registrants ofrecord through their registrars." Stephanie Perrin:@Amr yes! Amr Elsadr:The proposed shorter version was "the data set to be relied upon in caseof doubt". Carlton Samuels:@Amr: +1. No need to reinvent the wheel here! Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 andrew Stephanie Perrin:Right and it has no relation to accuracy Lisa Phifer:All, refer to ICANN58 and last week's call notes for discussion about the Thick WHOIS definition and other interpretations given by WG members Amr Elsadr:@Stephanie: Actually, there is reference to the assumption of accuracy of authoritative data in the "thick" WHOIS definition. andrew sullivan:For geeks. "authoritative" means something like "data-theoretic canonical source", not "acciurate picture of the world", which is why "authoritative" is in use in the spec for RDAP. But I appreciate that other communities use the term in a different way, particularly with the connotation of data accurancy Carlton Samuels:@Amr: Which is why I used the word 'verified' since it includes the notion of accuracy and 'ftiness'. Alex Deacon:+1 andrew andrew sullivan:accuracy. For nerds like me, authoritative data is _by definition_ accurate in the sense that it's the real data, but it is not accurate in the sense of capturing the world Mike Hammer:+1 Andrew Theo Geurts:Agreed Andrew Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):+1 Andrew Michael Palage:Here is the reconsideration request I just referenced - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources... Lisa Phifer:Authoritative IS the goal of 2a, if separated from 2b, hard to poll on 2a without it Roger Carney:@andrew I like the nerd definition except I would say "may not be reflect the real world" Stephanie Perrin:The problem with any use of the word accurate assumes verification, a function which we have not yet got to. Lisa Phifer:C: A purpose of RDS policy is to facilitate the accuracy of gTLD registration data. Lisa Phifer:A: Same thing, plus footnote Stephanie Perrin:Amr yes, Thick was not doing what we are doing. We are doing a more or less de novo review of RDS. Thick was not., am I right? It assumed the verification requirements already pushed into the 2013 RAA? Amr Elsadr:@Stephanie: Correct. It was also meant to be helpful in eventual migration to a de novo RDS, especially from a consistent labelling and display perspective. Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 on A and delete Lisa Phifer:How many people on this call woudl prefer to delete 5) entirely? Mike Hammer:Not meant as a troll - Is accuracy important? Greg Shatan:Yes Lisa Phifer:Does "set this aside" mean delete 5 or keep as A (with footnote deferring "accuracy" to that charter question) Vicky Sheckler:i don't understand concept re: accuracy is outside of RDS Mike Hammer:The discussion has been about information going in but what if "We" know that there is inaccurate data in the RDS? Vicky Sheckler:agree with chuck Lisa Phifer:Our charter asks this WG to identify requirements for accuracy - that could be none, or a specific set of requirements Lisa Phifer:RDS policy covers what data is collected and maintained, not just what data is accessed and how andrew sullivan:I'd just as soon delete 5. My "don't care about this" remark is basically that I think the policy is crazy. If we had proper controls on access the incentive to lie wouldn't be there except for criminals, and any policy attempting to make them behave is doomed Theo Geurts:+1 Jim Galvin Alex Deacon:lol Bastiaan Goslings:I agree with Jim: the RDS is the repository that conatins registration data. It would be agnostic with regard to the accuracy of these data Vicky Sheckler:disagree re: accuracy outside of RDS. whether it is a purpose or requirement we an discuss, but suggesting that some diligence /s afeguards to improve accuracy in registrant data is important Mike Hammer:@Alex, I think abuse and criminal activity is a much larger cause of bad data. Sam Lanfranco npoc/csih:Sorry to arrive late. Read Chat - Working on Discussion Notes: Lisa Phifer:Alternative A: 5) A purpose of RDS policy is to facilitate the accuracy [#] of gTLD registration data.Footnote: [#] "Accuracy" as it pertains to the RDS will be defined later in this PDP (see Charterquestion on Accuracy). Alex Deacon:@mike agree Mike Hammer:The solution to "true" privacy concerns is to make private registration services responsible for the domains they are listed as the registrant of. Lisa Phifer:Policy was added after discussing this same point previously (RDS involvement) Lisa Phifer:Green = delete now Stephanie Perrin:we do not, in my view, have decent metrics on accuracy....where the inaccurate data is coming from, what the metrics of verification efforts tell us in terms of verification policy and implementation, what use LEAs get from bad data from criminals, what criminals will do if they cannot insert bad data in their registrations, etc. SO I am not optimistic, absent unavailable data, that this will be an easy discussion. Lisa Phifer:Red = retain for future discussion Mike Hammer:Perhaps set it aside for a specific time frame. Tim O'Brien:from my own analysis, accuracy is horrid (depending on the region/country/registrar) Jim Galvin (Afilias):+1 to chuck proposal to defer on this for now Greg Aaron:wait... if you're opposed? Please make choice clear, Chuck. Lisa Phifer:Proposal: Lacking clear direction, and unlikely to get clear direction from poll, retain Alternative A for now and include clear notation there is divergence on this, will revisit later Vicky Sheckler:apologies but I need to leave early. Marika Konings:Please make sure to mute your microphone when not speaking. andrew sullivan:agree w/ Marc but don't care too much Mike Hammer:Agree with putting a placeholder Tim O'Brien:same thing Tim O'Brien:put placeholder, and table conversation Lisa Phifer:Alternative is placeholder: "Accuracy as it pertains to the RDS will be defined later in this PDP (see Charter question on Accuracy)." Lisa Phifer:That's Alt A without the actual purpose David Cake:The term tabling doesn't mean the same thing to everyone, best avoided for international meetings Sam Lanfranco npoc/csih:Inaccurate sources: typos, out-of-date, deliberate. To minimize inaccuracy typos can be auto-caught.Out-of-date means periodic registration data confirmation. Both have technical solutions. Deliberate falsehood is an issue in itself and beyond this wg. andrew sullivan:Ok with me Rod Rasmussen:Green checkmark is there :-) Juan Manuel Rojas:+1 Rod Rasmussen:I'm always last on roll call... Lisa Phifer:sync off, you can scroll yourselves Lisa Phifer:This is merge of https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dow... Lisa Phifer:and Annex D of EWG report for thin data elements only https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system... Lisa Phifer:The merged doc being displayed can be downloaded from https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dow... Chuck Gomes:Let's bring up annex D Lisa Phifer:@Rod, @Andrew - Andrew worked from specific purposes in the RDS statement of purpose. Rod worked from individual purposes for collection/access. Which is the btetter starting point? Lisa Phifer:Or both andrew sullivan:I don't care -- the idea that I had was to demonstrate, really, that one ends up at the same point :) Benny Samuelsen / Nordreg AB:speak up please Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):low volume :( Marc Anderson:I have to drop. Thank you all Bastiaan Goslings:When we are talking about 'privavcy'we are talking about who has access to data and under which conditions right? That is a separate question IMO from the one which (categories of) data the RDS needs to contain based on the purposes we come up with Theo Geurts:we talking about what is accesable at a "basic" level, gated access comes later. Alex Deacon:gotta run...thanks! Bastiaan Goslings:@Theo: thanks. That suggests to me that 'privacy' should also come later Chris Pelling:Thanks all :) Sara Bockey:thanks all andrew sullivan:thank you all and bye Nathalie Coupet:Bye all Theo Geurts:cyas Patrick Lenihan:Thanks to Each and All! Juan Manuel Rojas:Thanks all, bye all Maxim Alzoba (FAITID):bye all Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Sam Lanfranco npoc/csih:bye