[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] @EXT: RE: Use cases: Fundamental, Incidental, and Theoretical

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 06:57:48PM +0200, Volker Greimann wrote:
> a) NO data is collected;
> 
> b) NO ONE has access to any of the collected data;
> 
> c) collected data may not be requested/used for any purpose.

A while ago I attempted to offer some drawings about how the RDS
works, in an effort to allow us to talk meaningfully about options
before us.  The above simply ignores a basic point in all of those
diagrams: the RDS is a query-only interface to registration data.

Therefore, none of the options a-c above are even logically possibly
true.  _Some_ data will be collected, however minimal, to support the
function of registering names in the DNS.  Someone will have access to
that data.  And national authorities can always demand such data of
people under their own legal jurisdictions.

If we are actually going to debate this point, then I think this WG is
a waste of time.  It is just not possible to start from the above
premises even in theory, and if people want to debate the states of
affairs in the logically possible universe in which the RDS is a mud
puddle I will go find something useful to do.

If, however, we want to start from the plain facts that (1) the
existing system exposes everything because it is a broken protocol and
(2) at least most of the data currently collected has utility directly
relevant to registration of domain names as part of the global DNS,
then we can instead talk meaningfully about what that data is, whether
it ought to be collected at all, and whether that utility means it
needs to be disclosed to anyone.
 
> From that basic level (which admittely is so extreme it cannot be our final
> result)

That's not the reason I object, please note.

> To your examples: To drive and/or fly, you need a license and it is
> regulated how to get one and who may apply for one.

The analogy breaks down immediately, of course, because such
regulations are at least bound to nation-states if not subdivisions
within them, and sometimes by treaties.  Since the Internet does not
provide the facilities for such governmental regulation without
breaking the basic assumptions of internetworking, there may be a
difference that makes a difference here.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com