[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners
Michele Neylon - Blacknight
michele at blacknight.com
Thu Sep 28 14:25:06 UTC 2017
John
Congress cannot mandate anything on me. Remember both me and my company are 100% Ireland based.
Your US court orders are not going to be acted on by non-US registrars or registries.
With respect to data – your response is very confusing. If we or any of the other registrars were to turn on whois privacy for all our clients or start offering it for free as you keep suggesting it’d be available and free to all registrants. You seem to be assuming that it would only be used by a small number of private individuals. If the cost goes away and registrars enable it by default the usage patterns will definitely change.
Have you actually read the PPSAI report?
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: John Bambenek <jcb at bambenekconsulting.com>
Date: Thursday 28 September 2017 at 15:19
To: Michele Neylon <michele at blacknight.com>
Cc: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners
First, I am not mandating anything to anyone. There may come a time I have Congress mandate things to you, but I have not lost hope in this process. The point of this group is to solve problems, I am suggesting one solution.
I am aware there are costs but if you go to gated whois/rds, based on the behavior of people on this list I am sure everyone in the privacy and security community will have essentially no access. I certainly won't have access to what I need. Hell we keep discussing whether authoritative nameservers should be made public.
I have not yet had to sue a registrar or registry to get information. I've made informal queries from time to time. But in gated whois, you will get all queries always. If I can't look it up, then I'll get the information somehow. That means for the millions of domains I track that pose an active non-theoretical privacy risk, I'll probably have to go to court.
That's fine, I'm admitted to the bar and can churn ad lib pleadings quick enough or I'll just pay Brickwork India to do it for me. So whatever your costs of responding now, with gated whois even if I don't become a lawsuit mill, your costs to deal with that? Add 2 if not 3 zeroes to it. Good news, because of where I am, I also get reimbursed for my fees. In fact, that could be quite a profitable lawfirm. I've helped elect a few judges here, I'll get the orders I need. Now that I think of it, the momentum here could be quite lucrative for me. But I'd rather spend my time going after cybercrime instead of Crtl-C Crtl-V subpoenas all day.
As far as satisfying my needs, I've described as have others what this gives us. Even the most stringent and aggressive investigators are on board. The reasoning goes like this. We use the presence of whois privacy as a risk factor. Combined with others we can decide to block or not. Consumers operating domains for personal use have defined patterns. For instance, if joe job has a domain for his gerbil collection, odds are he is not going to send out 10,000,000 emails with the subject INVOICE ATTACHED. If I wanted to, for instance, verify the authenticity of equifaxsecurity2017.com<http://equifaxsecurity2017.com> and I saw whois privacy, I can make a decision about its legitimacy BEFORE I send them my sensitive information. And sadly that actually is necessary in that case.
Consumers and others can verify BEFORE sensitive transactions the authenticity of something. For instance, the infamous John Podesta email hack via google password reset phish. You can check the domain of the link (now it'll say suspended) and know if its not google based on the record even with whois privacy protection. Companies don't use it because they WANT people to find them.
Even if the registrant adds fake data instead, I can track and correlate. I was able to find, for instance, all the facets of the Russian disinformation operations by correlating whois data (and for that matter it helped find the attempts in France too). Because the criminals know we use whois privacy as a risk factor, they don't use it. The just populate with fake data which we can then correlate with.
Whois privacy is rarely used in domains I track that are malicious. If whois privacy was free I doubt that would change. Yes, I would lose some data, even some that's potentially relevant. But that is what compromise is, an attempt to balance ALL needs to serve the most good.
If you want your record private and you are a natural person, check a box. After that it isn't a question of publishing sensitive data, because the CONSUMER makes the choice of what to publish. People publish nudes on twitter. That's their choice.
Let us give CONSUMERS the power to choose what it done with their data. Not make the choice for them. We will continue doing what we've always done, perhaps with some minor data loss but we can still protect the security and privacy of our constituents without forcing us to get court orders.
J
--
John Bambenek
On Sep 28, 2017, at 08:56, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com<mailto:michele at blacknight.com>> wrote:
John
I’d recommend you read the full report on PPSAI which explores in depth the entire whois privacy / proxy situation.
There are significant costs for service providers associated with offering whois privacy / proxy. When whois privacy is enabled the service provider will bear the brunt of enquiries and complaints.
It is definitely not a free service. While some providers may choose, as their business model, to offer whois privacy that is their choice to make. Not yours.
Also I fail to understand how whois privacy would satisfy your desires to have unrestricted access to the underlying registration data. If we put whois privacy on all gTLD domain names registered through us you would never get access to the underlying data.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
Reply-To: John Bambenek <jcb at bambenekconsulting.com<mailto:jcb at bambenekconsulting.com>>
Date: Thursday 28 September 2017 at 14:51
To: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>
Cc: "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners
Which is why whois privacy should be free for consumers which let's THEM make the decision what is sensitive and not US decide what is the norm for the entire planet for them.
I am unclear as to why this is an unsatisfactory answer.
--
John Bambenek
On Sep 28, 2017, at 08:36, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> wrote:
Making sensitive data public does not, by legal definition, change its character as personal data.
Stephanie P
On 2017-09-28 09:34, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
Public data cannot, by definition, be breached.
J
--
John Bambenek
On Sep 28, 2017, at 08:29, theo geurts <gtheo at xs4all.nl<mailto:gtheo at xs4all.nl>> wrote:
Indeed privacy prevents a lot of consumers being exploited.
Privacy by design usually plays a significant role when setting up security around databases. Often, less is more, data that is not present cannot cause a data breach. The GDPR had to set a whole bunch of rules around data breaches and response times and accounting. Though given the number of weekly data breaches, most likely for the best, yet it is still a load of rules to deal with.
Theo
On 28-9-2017 15:19, John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
Thankfully there are people who donate their time and talent tackling the privacy and security risks that are seeking to exploit consumers. ;)
--
John Bambenek
On Sep 28, 2017, at 03:08, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
The role of ICANN to ensure the stability and security of the internet is a technical role, not one of being an internet policeman. That role is already filled by internet policemen.
Volker
Am 27.09.2017 um 20:05 schrieb Chuck:
Without at all minimizing ICANN’s role with regard to security and stability of the Internet because I do believe that is a critical role, I do want to point out that that also is a limited role. Here is a copy of the first part of ICANN’s mission from its Bylaws:
“Section 1.1. MISSION
(a) The mission of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN") is to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems as described in this Section 1.1(a) (the "Mission"). Specifically, ICANN:
(i) Coordinates the allocation and assignment of names in the root zone of the Domain Name System ("DNS") and coordinates the development and implementation of policies concerning the registration of second-level domain names in generic top-level domains ("gTLDs"). In this role, ICANN's scope is to coordinate the development and implementation of policies:
· For which uniform or coordinated resolution is reasonably necessary to facilitate the openness, interoperability, resilience, security and/or stability of the DNS including, with respect to gTLD registrars and registries, policies in the areas described in Annex G-1 and Annex G-2; and
· That are developed through a bottom-up consensus-based multistakeholder process and designed to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique names systems.
The issues, policies, procedures, and principles addressed in Annex G-1 and Annex G-2 with respect to gTLD registrars and registries shall be deemed to be within ICANN's Mission.
. . .”
Note in (a) and the second bullet under (i) that it says “to ensure the stable and secure operation of the Internet's unique identifier systems”. ICANN’s security and stability role is limited to its responsibilities involving the ‘Internet's unique identifier systems’. I am pretty sure everyone understands that but wanted to make sure. For our purposes in this WG, ICANN has a clear mandate to ensure security and stability of the generic domain names system.
Chuck
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 9:12 AM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] ICANN Meetings/Conversations with Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners
Except that the domain name system is not YOUR system, it is ICANN's who has a very clear mandate for the security and stability of the internet.
The purpose is NOT letting registrants get domains and helping registries get paid. It never has been.
On 09/27/2017 09:52 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
Hi Greg,
I think we need to dig down even deeper initially. Instead of RDS, the core of the matter is the need for the data when defining the purpose for collection.
This is very easy to answer for registrars: "We need (certain elements of) the data to be able to properly provide the business, invoice the customer, collect his payments, send reminders and notices, protect the rights of the customers in case of business failure, comply with legal requirements like record-keeping, etc.". I am leaving out any contractual requirements, as they do not matter for the registrars' own purpose. These are external purposes that the registrar would have to execute without having an own, direct need for.
For registries, it gets fuzzier as they do not have a direct connection to the registrants. From a service provision perspective, registries have no need for the data, and no right to it, except maybe for purposes of eligibility verification.
When going beyond registries to the general public, there is no purpose that connects to the provision of the service to the registrant directly. There also (in most countries) is no legal requirement to collect and publish this data. Yet there is still a need for the data, as we have discussed in great detail.
So our first question always must be the following:
"How do we serve the needs of the general public that has an interest in the ability of obtaining such data without violating any applicable laws or the rights of the registrant to the privacy of his data?"
This has to be the basis of any design decision and any argument made in this group.
Arguing that certain laws are unreasonable or unworkable is a dangerous question as it effectively proposes to ignore laws that we as a community do not like, at the risk of contracted parties and to the detriment of the beneficiaries of such laws. just because there has not been any enforcement action in the past does not mean we can ignore the law applicable to the individual contracted parties. And we are not talking about jaywalking here, some of these laws have significant penalties attached to them, as we have also discussed before.
I agree with Greg that the ability of contracted parties to be free to make business decisions cannot be absolute. It has to be bound on the one side by ICANN policies and the other side by applicable law. And these two external pressures should not be in conflict with each other. If we can achieve that while answering the basic question above, our work is done. At least for the time being, as laws may obviously change, but that can be taken into account as well. Any discussion that seeks to circumvent this basic question will ultimately lead to the failure of our work and by extention to the end of whois. The latter due to the incompatibility of current whois with applicable law.
I think with our initial "purpose definition" exercise, we already went a great way in determining what those needs are and our current work to discuss data points goes into that question as well, even though personally I feel that by defining data points at this point and going into the sticks in some of the discussions we are wasting time. The question should never be "Do we need a Facebook contact in the RDS?" and always be "What contacts are needed as bare minimum to achieve needs X, Y, Z, ...".
Best,
Volker
Am 27.09.2017 um 16:00 schrieb Greg Shatan:
The "data controllers" here do not exist in a vacuum. While registrars and registries need to be free to make many types of decisions in their own business judgment, that cannot be an absolute rule. This is at odds with the ICANN model, consensus policy, etc. In this case, the data controllers are part of a larger ecosystem, and the "needs" go beyond the individual business needs of each data controller. (Indeed, the individual data controller has its own database of information for its business needs.)
As I previously noted, we are going back to first principles -- which is not necessarily a bad thing. Why does ICANN (and by extension, the Internet) need WHOIS/RDS? That is the question. Not "why does a particular [registrar/registry] need WHOIS/RDS?"
Greg
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 5:12 AM, Volker Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
So when will you start advocating the collection and publication of WHOIS for internet users? Because they would be connecting to your network all the time...
Volker
Am 26.09.2017 um 20:48 schrieb John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg:
"As for privacy proxy solving the problem, it does not. Over collection is not solved by providing a proxy in the third party disclosure mechanism. It is still over-collection, disproportionate to needs."
I fundamentally disagree because the purpose of ICANN is not the mere facilitation of domain from registry to registrant. The purpose is the security and stability of the internet and that means I have a need to verify who is connecting to my network and have a means of contacting them. That point has never been made, to my knowledge, to them.
The point that removing that ability of me being able to contact domain owners does far MORE to REDUCE the privacy of the registrants than does publishing said information. We talk often about verification out-of-band for sensitive communications. How can I do that without a phone number?
I will loudly and vigorously argue that the path advocated will make the problem FAR worse and not better. Hopefully we don't get to the point where I have actual data to prove that.
On 9/26/2017 1:34 PM, Stephanie Perrin wrote:
As for privacy proxy solving the problem, it does not. Over collection is not solved by providing a proxy in the third party disclosure mechanism. It is still over-collection, disproportionate to needs.
--
--
John Bambenek
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:+49%206894%209396901>
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:+49%206894%209396851>
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901<tel:+49%206894%209396901>
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851<tel:+49%206894%209396851>
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
_______________________________________________ gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin
Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.
--------------------------------------------
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards,
Volker A. Greimann
- legal department -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net<mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>
www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>
Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
CEO: Alexander Siffrin
Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>
This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170928/b0a05938/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list