[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Data Collection Details

Graeme Bunton gbunton at tucows.com
Sun Sep 28 22:47:12 UTC 2014

So, requests 3 and 4 on our list were:
3 - Can providers give the WG some general information about the 
percentage of requests for disclosure that are successful
4 - For Q4, do providers also have information about the type of claims 
those relate to e.g. If they are from LEA, 3P IP claim etc.?
And I agreed to provide some colour as to why these are probably 
difficult questions to answer.  The below should be true for most 
providers (and really, for any support system), but should any Registrar 
colleagues disagree, feel free to chime in.
The concise reason is that compliance desks are optimized for throughput 
of issues, and not for policy related reporting.
In more detail -
Compliance (or whatever dept that deals with issues around domains) may 
not use a ticketing system.  If the provider is small enough, it may 
just be an email address.   There is no obligation for anyone to use a 
system that is even capable of producing data, or from which data may 
easily be extracted.
Even if they do use a system robust enough to allow for reporting, the 
data we're requesting may not typically be captured in the course of an 
investigation, or even useful for the running of the business. For 
question 3, for example, 'successful disclosure' is mostly relevant to 
the requester, but is not an attribute required to close the ticket.  
That information may be captured as text inside a description, but if 
it's not a specific flag on the ticket, it's very very difficult to 
report on accurately.  We at Tucows occasionally mine the text of the 
tickets related to our retail operations, and the results are always 
considerably noisy.
Question 4 presumes that requester type as well as as issue type are 
ticket attributes.  I would think that some such systems do capture the 
issue type (IP, defamation, offensive, etc etc) but each service 
provider is going to have differently defined categories that may cause 
difficulty in the aggregation.  As well, just because a claim is made, 
doesn't mean it has any particular validity which impacts 
categorization.  If someone claims IP infringement, but our 
investigation yields no such issue, does the category still stand?  As 
well, because requests are usually dealt with manually, categorizing 
requesters may be unlikely, aside from a distinction between LEA and 
Lastly, as should be clear from previous discussions, there are very few 
black and white issues that we see.  Given the variety of issues and the 
multitude of interest areas that they cross, straightforward 
classification is exceptionally difficult, and analysis that attempts to 
place requests into distinct buckets is going to lose a substantial 
amount of detail.  Nonetheless, I'm in the process of looking into our 
system at the moment to see if possible to sketch out some trends.  
Unfortunately, we migrated to a new platform earlier this year, so there 
is not much to draw from.

Graeme Bunton
Manager, Management Information Systems
Manager, Public Policy
Tucows Inc.
PH: 416 535 0123 ext 1634
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140928/469c2bde/attachment.html>

More information about the Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list