[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] IMPORTANT: Invitation for Poll from 20 September Meeting

[Paul Keating]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the response.

Are you advocating that this WG needs to expand the meaning of RDS to
include
the history of domains?

I do not see the difference. I want to make sure that the ³purposes² are
applicable to both current RDS data elements and those already captured.
It is unrealistic to presume that only current data will be retained.
And, historical data is consistent with purpose.  For example, if ³a²
purpose is for security it would seem that this purpose applies not only
to current data elements but also to historical ones.

And, in any event, consideration must be given to the real application at
the collection level.  I think it would be rather foolhardy to narrow our
focus on immediate collection and not also consider impact on data
retention.  Otherwise we are handing the collectors a problem to deal with
in terms of monitoring their database 24/7.

Paul 



On 9/21/17, 3:06 PM, "Andrew Sullivan" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
on behalf of ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:54:40PM +0200, Paul Keating wrote:
>> It is also important to include purposes that would reach historical
>>data
>> that has already been collected.
>
>That would be an entirely new service from the existing RDDS.  Are you
>advocating that this WG needs to expand the meaning of RDS to include
>the history of domains?  Because as far as I know such a service is
>not contractually required of registries or registrars today.
>
>> We also need to allow for the adoption of additional purposes in the
>>future.
>> As an example, 4 years ago WHOIS was not commonly used in cyber security
>> research.  Today it is one of the more important tools used by all
>> investigators.
>
>I do not believe that it was not commonly used that way 4 years ago.
>Indeed, when we stood up .info in 2001, I recall some of the feature
>decisions we made were there for security-research reasons.  Moreover,
>you are suggesting that the list of reasons for collection needs to be
>open ended, but my impression from the privacy commissioner input
>we've had so far is that such an open-ended list is not allowed: if
>you have a new purpose, you need to introduce that to the parties
>whose data you are collecting and get explicit consent.  So I think we
>cannot do what you're envisioning here.
>
>Best regards,
>
>A
>
>-- 
>Andrew Sullivan
>ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>_______________________________________________
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg