[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] WSGR Final Memorandum
John Bambenek
jcb at bambenekconsulting.com
Fri Sep 29 15:49:01 UTC 2017
I don't think you understand how the internet works.
Neither you, Key Systems, ICANN or anyone on this list gets to decide
what criteria I use or do not use to filter email to my servers. I am
under no obligation under any jurisdiction on this planet or elsewhere
in the multiverse to allow you to send traffic to me. You can enjoy your
property... that does not dictate what I must do with my property to
allow you to enjoy THAT.
The internet is about voluntary interconnection... on all sides. You can
have a domain and put a webserver on it, you can control who goes to it
if you like. But if you want to send email, there are standards that are
well published of what we want to see, or we dump it to trash. Because
we aren't COMPELLED to interconnect with anyone. Taking away WHOIS data
is just going to make those decisions harder and more prone to
collateral damage. Which is why we are here.... we understand the risks
and we understand what we do. If you want to tackle abuse, great, let's
make a system that makes that job easier not harder.
j
On 9/29/2017 10:29 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
>
> Hi Allison,
>
> thank you for your explanation, which makes sense. It does seem though
> that your description of a domain registration that could "flip the
> switch" perfectly matches that of the domain I just registered for
> legitimate purposes:
>
> 1) Newly registered? Check!
>
> 2) Not pointing to the same IP for more than a month? Check (since it
> is a new registration, that would be hard )!
>
> 3) New TLD? Check! (I actually like using those - eat what you sell, I
> guess!)
>
> 4) Whois privacy turned on? Check!
>
> So the fact that I do not want the world to know where I live could be
> the deciding factor for you to limit my enjoyment of my property, and
> limit my ability to send emails to third parties using that domain
> name as email address. I do not think I like that very much.
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
>
>
> Am 29.09.2017 um 17:19 schrieb allison nixon:
>> No, so here is how reputation works. Privacy is one factor out of
>> many. When assessing a domain, you have datapoints like the date
>> registered, the registrar, the TLD, yes/no on whois privacy, any
>> exposed contents of whois, the IP it points to, and a number of other
>> factors.
>>
>> Say there is a years-old domain, that has pointed to the same IP for
>> years, but has WHOIS privacy turned on, and no bad incidents attached
>> to it. That domain has an otherwise good reputation, despite the
>> WHOIS privacy it is fine and it won't be blocked.
>>
>> Now imagine another domain, which is newly registered, less than a
>> month old and has WHOIS privacy turned on, has pointed to the same IP
>> for less than a month, and has no bad incidents attached to it. It's
>> status is ambiguous, and the fact that WHOIS privacy is turned on may
>> be the deciding factor flipping the switch to filter any emails sent
>> using that domain. If the WHOIS privacy was turned off and the
>> details pointed to a known company, that may flip the switch the
>> other way and the domain may not be blocked.
>>
>> It's an oversimplification but that's how it works.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Volker Greimann
>> <vgreimann at key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Allison,
>>
>> I do not appreciate the comment you made and do not agree that
>> there is a difference, but I think we should take part of our
>> discussion off the list as it does not benefit the rest of the
>> group. You obviously seem to be unwilling to conform to the
>> standards we all agreed to and I will take that into account
>> going forward.
>>
>> The claim that use of privacy indicates a higher propensity for
>> abuse as alleged by Michael was not supported by the study. While
>> privacy may be an indicator if all other stars align, by itself
>> it is not.Once privacy becomes the norm, it will mean nothing.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Volker
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 29.09.2017 um 17:02 schrieb allison nixon:
>>> >>Again, I resent your allegation and expect you to take it
>>> back. Name-calling and loosely flung accusations of trolling do
>>> not conform to the standard of behavior we all agreed to.
>>>
>>> See my explanation in my other email. I did not call you A
>>> troll, and i was not calling you names. i described your
>>> behavior as trolling and i explained why in the other thread.
>>>
>>> >>I must admit that I have not read that other study yet, so I
>>> cannot comment on their conclusion. This study here however
>>> reached another conclusion:
>>>
>>> "The analysis of the use of WHOIS Privacy and Proxy
>>> services leads us to conclude that the usage of a WHOIS
>>> Privacy and Proxy services by itself is not a reliable indicator
>>> of malicious activity. Apart from the peaks, the usage of
>>> Privacy and Proxy services for abusive domains is not that
>>> high (see Figure 28, Figure 29)."
>>>
>>> You are once again misinterpreting the simple english in that
>>> sentence. It is saying the use of WHOIS privacy *BY ITSELF* is
>>> not a reliable indicator of malicious activity. Meaning, in a
>>> vaccuum, with no other information about the domain, it doesn't
>>> guarantee the domain is malicious. If you actually understood
>>> the problem space, or read any of the other 32 pages of the
>>> study, you would discover that domain reputation relies on a
>>> large number of indicators and WHOIS privacy is only one
>>> indicator, and that the sentence is neither vindication nor
>>> damnation of the service.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Volker Greimann
>>> <vgreimann at key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Again, I resent your allegation and expect you to take it
>>> back. Name-calling and loosely flung accusations of trolling
>>> do not conform to the standard of behavior we all agreed to.
>>>
>>> I must admit that I have not read that other study yet, so I
>>> cannot comment on their conclusion. This study here however
>>> reached another conclusion:
>>>
>>> "The analysis of the use of WHOIS Privacy and Proxy
>>> services leads us to conclude that the usage of a WHOIS
>>> Privacy and Proxy services by itself is not a reliable indicator
>>> of malicious activity. Apart from the peaks, the usage of
>>> Privacy and Proxy services for abusive domains is not that
>>> high (see Figure 28, Figure 29)."
>>>
>>> Volker
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 29.09.2017 um 16:15 schrieb allison nixon:
>>>>
>>>> Then you should have read the exact next sentence following
>>>> the one that you took to vaguely support your argument:
>>>>
>>>> "There are many legitimate reasons why someone may want
>>>> to conceal possession of a domain name. The usage of a
>>>> WHOIS Privacy and Proxy services by itself is, therefore not a
>>>> reliable single indicator of malicious activity.*A previous
>>>> study*
>>>> *by National Physical Laboratories [44], however did find that*
>>>> *a significant portion of abusive domains use Privacy and
>>>> Proxy*
>>>> *services.*"
>>>>
>>>> You are trolling once again.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Volker Greimann
>>>> <vgreimann at key-systems.net
>>>> <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not really, since Mike was alleging that there is a
>>>> correlation between the use of whois privacy and abuse,
>>>> whereas the study says the opposite.
>>>>
>>>> Whois data may have its use for fighting abuse, but
>>>> private registrations are not an indicator of abuse,
>>>> according to the study. I have not seen a study that
>>>> showed there is a correlation.
>>>>
>>>> Volker
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 29.09.2017 um 15:05 schrieb John Bambenek:
>>>>> I think you mistake his point. Domain whois data IS
>>>>> useful in fighting abuse according to everyone who
>>>>> actually fights abuse. The report referenced making
>>>>> the statement it did shows there remains a
>>>>> misunderstanding on that point.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Volker Greimann
>>>>> <vgreimann at key-systems.net
>>>>> <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Theo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it is interesting that despite studies showing there
>>>>>> is no correlation between domain abuse and use of
>>>>>> domain privacy, the same argument is being raised
>>>>>> again and again. from my own experience of looking at
>>>>>> the abuse complaints we receive, I note that only a
>>>>>> small fraction of abusive registrations use our
>>>>>> privacy functions. In most cases, harvested real data
>>>>>> is used instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Volker
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sadag-final-09aug17-en.pdf
>>>>>>> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sadag-final-09aug17-en.pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This report mentions: The usage of Privacy or Proxy
>>>>>>> Services by itself is not a reliable indicator of abuse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks again,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again it is clear now, thanks all.
>>>>>>> On 28-9-2017 20:50, Dotzero wrote:
>>>>>>>> To add to what Allison has indicated, websites do
>>>>>>>> analysis of these sorts of datapoints for
>>>>>>>> evaluating transactions for fraud and potential
>>>>>>>> abuse. For example, signups form domains that have
>>>>>>>> private registrations have a very high propensity
>>>>>>>> to be related to abuse. Signups and visits to our
>>>>>>>> websites from IP addresses belonging to hosting
>>>>>>>> providers have an even higher correlation with
>>>>>>>> abuse (how many endusers browse the web from severs
>>>>>>>> in datacenters?).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is not police action, it is organizations
>>>>>>>> protecting themselves, their other users and the
>>>>>>>> internet at large from abusive activity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael Hammer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:33 PM, allison nixon
>>>>>>>> <elsakoo at gmail.com <mailto:elsakoo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Reputation is based on a lot of different
>>>>>>>> points not just contents of WHOIS data. If the
>>>>>>>> .EU TLD can keep its customer base clean, there
>>>>>>>> isn't much need for WHOIS data for the most
>>>>>>>> part, however this group doesn't make policy
>>>>>>>> for ccTLDs. For other TLDs that this group does
>>>>>>>> recommend policy for, for example, .XYZ, which
>>>>>>>> boasts a greater-than-90-percent rate of
>>>>>>>> maliciousness, any legitimate domain in that
>>>>>>>> space will need some other points of reputation
>>>>>>>> to make up for that. WHOIS is part of that,
>>>>>>>> including the age, and actual contact details.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That said, WHOIS data is an important part of
>>>>>>>> tracing ownership and it can have consequences
>>>>>>>> for the registrant.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Recently we had to deal with a ccTLD of .ir
>>>>>>>> that was being used to control large botnets.
>>>>>>>> The current and historical WHOIS data showed
>>>>>>>> signs that a legitimate registrant's account
>>>>>>>> was stolen to do this. Thus, when the complaint
>>>>>>>> was sent to the registrar, the registrant was
>>>>>>>> not accused of running botnets, but instead the
>>>>>>>> registrar was alerted to an abuse of the
>>>>>>>> service and they could take action accordingly.
>>>>>>>> If the ownership of this domain could not be
>>>>>>>> traced, and if there were not skilled
>>>>>>>> investigators on the other end, would the
>>>>>>>> registrant have been in danger of going to an
>>>>>>>> Iranian prison?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It turns out, the ccTLD of .ir was specifically
>>>>>>>> chosen because the criminals thought the poor
>>>>>>>> international relations would hamper law
>>>>>>>> enforcement action. However WHOIS and the
>>>>>>>> transparency it provides allowed people to
>>>>>>>> discover the truth and prevent serious
>>>>>>>> problems. By locking up WHOIS behind court
>>>>>>>> orders, these cross-border issues will become
>>>>>>>> worse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, to be clear since a lot of people can't
>>>>>>>> seem to tell the difference, everything we did
>>>>>>>> was well within the bounds of civil action, we
>>>>>>>> weren't "pretending to be the police" or any of
>>>>>>>> the other things people in this group accuse
>>>>>>>> security companies of doing when they deal with
>>>>>>>> malware. Any member of the public can file an
>>>>>>>> abuse complaint.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:10 PM, theo geurts
>>>>>>>> <gtheo at xs4all.nl <mailto:gtheo at xs4all.nl>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Allison,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does this problem also exsist with TLDs
>>>>>>>> like .EU, .NL, .DE, .FR just to name a few
>>>>>>>> ccTLDs?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Curious,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Theo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28-9-2017 19:42, allison nixon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> So, I can see a day that if privacy
>>>>>>>>> advocates and/or EU legislation fears
>>>>>>>>> prevent such a Best Practice as proper
>>>>>>>>> WHOIS records, the service providers will
>>>>>>>>> simply choose practices, such as 'you
>>>>>>>>> cannot access our service unless you have
>>>>>>>>> public whois information available'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's already happening. Try sending an
>>>>>>>>> e-mail using a domain behind WHOIS
>>>>>>>>> privacy. Some anti-spam systems drop it
>>>>>>>>> straight in the garbage because WHOIS
>>>>>>>>> privacy is already a negative reputation
>>>>>>>>> point. If WHOIS gets shut down, I fully
>>>>>>>>> expect groups like Spamhaus, M3AAWG, APWG,
>>>>>>>>> etc, to publish a set of guidelines that
>>>>>>>>> registrants need to abide by in order to
>>>>>>>>> send mail, or be accessible by people
>>>>>>>>> behind corporate firewalls that block
>>>>>>>>> based on reputation. ICANN must understand
>>>>>>>>> that they are at risk of losing relevancy
>>>>>>>>> if they want to take this hardline
>>>>>>>>> approach, because if a law breaks the
>>>>>>>>> continued functioning of a network, the
>>>>>>>>> network will route around it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Look at the "cookies" EU law. Did that
>>>>>>>>> actually stop any websites from using
>>>>>>>>> cookies? No, it just created a popup that
>>>>>>>>> no one reads but everyone clicks through
>>>>>>>>> to visit the website. Because breaking
>>>>>>>>> cookies breaks websites.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>Some of us have real jobs too..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which is the main reason why i can't spend
>>>>>>>>> 8 hours every day watching this group,
>>>>>>>>> unlike some people here who have been
>>>>>>>>> active in this group for years now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My response to Chuck's email earlier, I
>>>>>>>>> bolded the responses and tagged the start
>>>>>>>>> and end of my replies for clarity:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "independent answers to the same
>>>>>>>>> questions we asked the European data
>>>>>>>>> protection experts earlier in the year"
>>>>>>>>> [Chuck Gomes] That was a request from
>>>>>>>>> WG members who felt that the DP
>>>>>>>>> experts might be biased. The
>>>>>>>>> questions were developed by the WG.
>>>>>>>>> There were two primary reasons for
>>>>>>>>> using the same questions: 1) both
>>>>>>>>> groups would be responding to the same
>>>>>>>>> questions and therefore make it easy
>>>>>>>>> to compare; 2) the questions were
>>>>>>>>> approved by the WG.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *<allison>I don't think anyone accused the
>>>>>>>>> DP experts of being biased. The objection
>>>>>>>>> was that the questions themselves were
>>>>>>>>> biased. The words "phishing" and "spam"
>>>>>>>>> and "malware" never once appeared in this
>>>>>>>>> entire document, despite being major core
>>>>>>>>> issues. The only abuse issues that were
>>>>>>>>> focused on were in relation to
>>>>>>>>> intellectual property violation and
>>>>>>>>> harassment of women, both of which are not
>>>>>>>>> the major issues most of us deal with on a
>>>>>>>>> daily basis(not to belittle them but they
>>>>>>>>> are generally not the reason why we are
>>>>>>>>> here today). The word "fraud" was
>>>>>>>>> mentioned once in a question and then
>>>>>>>>> never directly addressed in the response.*
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *Additionally, my entire industry was
>>>>>>>>> grossly misrepresented in question #6.
>>>>>>>>> None of us operate with police powers, and
>>>>>>>>> none of us pretend to have any. When we
>>>>>>>>> submit a complaint to a registrar about
>>>>>>>>> one of their customers breaking the law,
>>>>>>>>> the illegality of the act provides
>>>>>>>>> necessary justification for the registrar
>>>>>>>>> to drop the customer without a refund.
>>>>>>>>> This is not prosecution of a crime, and
>>>>>>>>> claiming it is such is a lie. Evidence of
>>>>>>>>> breaking the law is necessary because
>>>>>>>>> registrars aren't just going to take down
>>>>>>>>> any customer we say we don't like. I
>>>>>>>>> wholly object to the entire line they
>>>>>>>>> continued on about cybersecurity companies
>>>>>>>>> and "quasi-police powers", because the
>>>>>>>>> question never differentiated between
>>>>>>>>> civil and criminal actions and it was
>>>>>>>>> therefore misleading. *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *None of the questions addressed the
>>>>>>>>> issues that registrants have where their
>>>>>>>>> WHOIS and other reputation points affect
>>>>>>>>> the de-facto functionality of a domain,
>>>>>>>>> for example a domain's functionality is
>>>>>>>>> hampered when it is on blocklists. Or if
>>>>>>>>> someone sends a complaint against the
>>>>>>>>> domain and has no tools to differentiate
>>>>>>>>> the registrant from the criminal (as
>>>>>>>>> registrar accounts are often hacked), then
>>>>>>>>> the incorrect accusation can also affect
>>>>>>>>> the operability of the domain as it is
>>>>>>>>> mistakenly taken down in confusion. None
>>>>>>>>> of the questions ask about conflicts
>>>>>>>>> between GDPR and basic
>>>>>>>>> network-level-functionality of domains.*
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *Also, none of the questions ask if a free
>>>>>>>>> no-obligation alternative (whois privacy
>>>>>>>>> protect) enhances the validity of consent
>>>>>>>>> given for making WHOIS records public.
>>>>>>>>> </allison>*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So we weren't allowed to ask questions
>>>>>>>>> of these legal experts? You know, they
>>>>>>>>> can't magically divine all legitimate
>>>>>>>>> use cases. The session with the EU
>>>>>>>>> data protection experts earlier this
>>>>>>>>> year is the exact same one we objected
>>>>>>>>> to because anti abuse use cases got
>>>>>>>>> exactly zero representation. So why
>>>>>>>>> choose that exact set of questions
>>>>>>>>> again especially since an entire group
>>>>>>>>> of people have joined the group
>>>>>>>>> afterwards(actually, due to this
>>>>>>>>> specific problem of lack of
>>>>>>>>> representation)? And then label it
>>>>>>>>> "final", really.
>>>>>>>>> [Chuck Gomes] We didn’t ask them to
>>>>>>>>> consider use cases except as they were
>>>>>>>>> relevant to the questions we asked;
>>>>>>>>> that is our job and we prepared a list
>>>>>>>>> of those a long time ago. We asked
>>>>>>>>> them to focus on their understanding
>>>>>>>>> of European Data Protection law. Our
>>>>>>>>> WG has a good mix of people that use
>>>>>>>>> RDS data for different uses.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *<allison>And his answers are borderline
>>>>>>>>> useless. The scenarios presented were
>>>>>>>>> extremely poor, and not reflecting today's
>>>>>>>>> Internet and the problems network
>>>>>>>>> operators face. For example, when he
>>>>>>>>> writes "This means that the term 'vital
>>>>>>>>> interest' is to be interpreted as
>>>>>>>>> referring to an individual’s life, health,
>>>>>>>>> safety, or other such interest that is
>>>>>>>>> essential to their physical wellbeing", he
>>>>>>>>> goes on to talk about IP violations, the
>>>>>>>>> rights of a child, the economic interests
>>>>>>>>> of a search engine, finally concluding "we
>>>>>>>>> believe that the **conditions for using
>>>>>>>>> the 'legitimate interests' legal basis
>>>>>>>>> would not be satisfied".*
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *That's a complete misrepresentation of
>>>>>>>>> the interests at stake here. The issue at
>>>>>>>>> hand is not the economic interests of one
>>>>>>>>> company nor about mere copyright
>>>>>>>>> infringement. The WHOIS data resource is
>>>>>>>>> used to combat all types of fraud,
>>>>>>>>> international espionage, rigging of
>>>>>>>>> elections, and so many hostile attacks.
>>>>>>>>> Some of these attacks, especially DDOS,
>>>>>>>>> frequently threaten basic functionality of
>>>>>>>>> the Internet. It has an international
>>>>>>>>> strategic value and promotes lawful
>>>>>>>>> behavior far more than it hurts. It's used
>>>>>>>>> to create cleaner, safer networks. There
>>>>>>>>> are countless documented instances where
>>>>>>>>> WHOIS played a key role and where the
>>>>>>>>> replacement system would have allowed the
>>>>>>>>> malicious behavior to continue. All of
>>>>>>>>> these facts have been conveniently left
>>>>>>>>> out of the question, and since the lawyer
>>>>>>>>> can't be expected to know all this, he has
>>>>>>>>> no choice but to conclude that the
>>>>>>>>> legitimate interests provided are too
>>>>>>>>> weak. </allison>*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Havent gone through it yet, will do so
>>>>>>>>> as i get time. Expecting to see the
>>>>>>>>> same result one can expect when one
>>>>>>>>> doesn't represent entire groups of
>>>>>>>>> constituencies.
>>>>>>>>> [Chuck Gomes] What do you mean by
>>>>>>>>> representing ‘entire groups of
>>>>>>>>> constituencies’? Do you represent an
>>>>>>>>> entire constituency? Are you aware of
>>>>>>>>> any constituencies who are not
>>>>>>>>> represented in the WG? If so, please
>>>>>>>>> encourage them to participate.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *<allison>Dozens of people joined this
>>>>>>>>> mailing list after numerous events
>>>>>>>>> demonstrated that this working group did
>>>>>>>>> not consider the overall well being of the
>>>>>>>>> Internet, and had a completely skewed idea
>>>>>>>>> of the problems the Internet faces today.
>>>>>>>>> People were outraged that this group was
>>>>>>>>> going in the direction it was going,
>>>>>>>>> ignoring how the Internet actually works.
>>>>>>>>> The fact that these questions were chosen-
>>>>>>>>> and the fact that the new
>>>>>>>>> membership(especially those that joined
>>>>>>>>> after the questions were initially asked)
>>>>>>>>> were not given any opportunity to provide
>>>>>>>>> input on questions to the lawyer- does not
>>>>>>>>> reflect well on the leadership of this
>>>>>>>>> working group. Even when the original
>>>>>>>>> questions were created, as far as I can
>>>>>>>>> tell, only people physically present at
>>>>>>>>> that meeting had any chance to provide
>>>>>>>>> input. For those of us with jobs in
>>>>>>>>> operations, being ever-present for this
>>>>>>>>> working group is impossible, and none of
>>>>>>>>> us have the stamina that some of the
>>>>>>>>> people here have, because we are busy
>>>>>>>>> working. *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *At its most charitable interpretation,
>>>>>>>>> the choice of these specific questions
>>>>>>>>> could be an innocent oversight or
>>>>>>>>> miscommunication. At its least charitable,
>>>>>>>>> it looks like ICANN's money was wasted on
>>>>>>>>> a procedural trick to keep facts out of
>>>>>>>>> the conversation and continue to push a
>>>>>>>>> narrow agenda.*
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> *People from numerous unrelated Internet
>>>>>>>>> companies and law firms flooded this group
>>>>>>>>> earlier this year once sunshine was shed
>>>>>>>>> on this group's activities. Maybe that's
>>>>>>>>> important. Please take it seriously.
>>>>>>>>> </allison>*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Michael
>>>>>>>>> Peddemors <michael at linuxmagic.com
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:michael at linuxmagic.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IMHO, If ICANN cannot figure out how
>>>>>>>>> to make a proper functioning WHOIS
>>>>>>>>> policy, we have to remember that the
>>>>>>>>> community at large will, and then
>>>>>>>>> simply, ICANN will loose relevance on
>>>>>>>>> this issue.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No one passed a law that a mail server
>>>>>>>>> had to have a functioning PTR record,
>>>>>>>>> (well yes, some international spam
>>>>>>>>> legislations clearly spelled out the
>>>>>>>>> need for clearly specifying the
>>>>>>>>> operator) but if you want to send
>>>>>>>>> email today, functionally you need a
>>>>>>>>> PTR record.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Only problem is, that often it is the
>>>>>>>>> biggest players that set those
>>>>>>>>> standards, and it is the role of
>>>>>>>>> organizations like ICANN to level the
>>>>>>>>> field, and make sure that directions
>>>>>>>>> aren't dictated by the biggest players
>>>>>>>>> on the block, and never more so in a
>>>>>>>>> world of consolidation and cloud
>>>>>>>>> providers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it was Yahoo that was one of
>>>>>>>>> the first big players to simply not
>>>>>>>>> accept connections from IP(s) with no
>>>>>>>>> PTR, and I know we were one of the
>>>>>>>>> early adopters to that strategy..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, I can see a day that if privacy
>>>>>>>>> advocates and/or EU legislation fears
>>>>>>>>> prevent such a Best Practice as proper
>>>>>>>>> WHOIS records, the service providers
>>>>>>>>> will simply choose practices, such as
>>>>>>>>> 'you cannot access our service unless
>>>>>>>>> you have public whois information
>>>>>>>>> available'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It would be far better if ICANN can
>>>>>>>>> understand the importance of that
>>>>>>>>> need, and make a statement that
>>>>>>>>> everyone can get behind and point to,
>>>>>>>>> that levels that field, in 'spite' of
>>>>>>>>> possible contradictory privacy
>>>>>>>>> information.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's just simple keep these two
>>>>>>>>> conversations separate, one should NOT
>>>>>>>>> affect the other, this isn't a privacy
>>>>>>>>> vs information publishing standards
>>>>>>>>> issue, we can have both.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (And again, I assert that simply
>>>>>>>>> 'informed consent' can always deal
>>>>>>>>> with any situations where they conflict)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- Michael --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PS, my concern is that this lengthy
>>>>>>>>> wrangling prevents real work from
>>>>>>>>> getting done, and the participants who
>>>>>>>>> are integral to this conversation will
>>>>>>>>> fall by the way side, and the
>>>>>>>>> lobbyist's will simply wear them down ..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some of us have real jobs too..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17-09-27 02:58 PM, John Bambenek
>>>>>>>>> via gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A simple policy proscription would
>>>>>>>>> be, for instance, to say under US
>>>>>>>>> law if you get a domain under the
>>>>>>>>> control of a US registrar, we need
>>>>>>>>> you to consent to full disclosure.
>>>>>>>>> Don't like it, pick a European
>>>>>>>>> ccTLD. I don't advocate that, mind
>>>>>>>>> you, but that's the kind of policy
>>>>>>>>> balkanization could produce.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> j
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 09/27/2017 04:31 PM, Paul
>>>>>>>>> Keating wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am failing to understand how
>>>>>>>>> such a walled-garden approach
>>>>>>>>> will solve anything.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1.EU <http://1.EU>
>>>>>>>>> registrars/registries would
>>>>>>>>> still have to deal with GDPR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2.Registrars are not aided by
>>>>>>>>> the distinction since they
>>>>>>>>> would still end up with EU
>>>>>>>>> customers and EU registrant data.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PRK
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>>>> on behalf of jonathan
>>>>>>>>> matkowsky
>>>>>>>>> <jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:jonathan.matkowsky at riskiq.net>>>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Wednesday, September 27,
>>>>>>>>> 2017 at 11:03 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: Rubens Kuhl
>>>>>>>>> <rubensk at nic.br
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: RDS PDP WG
>>>>>>>>> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg]
>>>>>>>>> WSGR Final Memorandum
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Assuming for argument's
>>>>>>>>> sake that's true without
>>>>>>>>> taking any
>>>>>>>>> position as I'm still
>>>>>>>>> catching up from a week ago,
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure
>>>>>>>>> this should be dismissed
>>>>>>>>> without consideration as a
>>>>>>>>> possibility,
>>>>>>>>> although obviously not by
>>>>>>>>> any stretch of the imagination
>>>>>>>>> ideal -->
>>>>>>>>> non-EU registrars block EU
>>>>>>>>> registrants, and registries
>>>>>>>>> contract
>>>>>>>>> with non-EU registrars.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at
>>>>>>>>> 8:25 PM, Rubens Kuhl
>>>>>>>>> <rubensk at nic.br
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:rubensk at nic.br>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 26, 2017,
>>>>>>>>> at 7:17 PM, John Horton
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <john.horton at legitscript.com
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:john.horton at legitscript.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:john.horton at legitscript.com
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:john.horton at legitscript.com>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Much of this
>>>>>>>>> problem goes away if we
>>>>>>>>> all agree that EU-based
>>>>>>>>> registrars should
>>>>>>>>> henceforth only be allowed
>>>>>>>>> to accept
>>>>>>>>> registrants in the
>>>>>>>>> EU. Aside from the effect
>>>>>>>>> on EU
>>>>>>>>> registrars'
>>>>>>>>> revenue, what's the
>>>>>>>>> logical argument against that
>>>>>>>>> from a policy
>>>>>>>>> perspective?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> After all, isn't
>>>>>>>>> the purpose of the GDPR to
>>>>>>>>> protect _EU
>>>>>>>>> residents_?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's correct, but
>>>>>>>>> the conclusion is not. Non-EU
>>>>>>>>> registrars
>>>>>>>>> are also subject to
>>>>>>>>> GDPR if targeting EU
>>>>>>>>> customers, which
>>>>>>>>> could be as simple as
>>>>>>>>> providing services in EU
>>>>>>>>> languages and
>>>>>>>>> accepting registration
>>>>>>>>> transactions from the EU.
>>>>>>>>> So, for the problem to
>>>>>>>>> go away non-EU registrars
>>>>>>>>> would need to
>>>>>>>>> block EU registrants,
>>>>>>>>> and registries would only be
>>>>>>>>> able to
>>>>>>>>> enter contracts with
>>>>>>>>> non-EU registrars.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So EU users would
>>>>>>>>> either be happy using numeric
>>>>>>>>> IP addresses,
>>>>>>>>> or develop a naming
>>>>>>>>> system of their own. Then we
>>>>>>>>> would have
>>>>>>>>> balkanisation, this
>>>>>>>>> time actually including the
>>>>>>>>> original balkans.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rubens
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>>>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *******************************************************************
>>>>>>>>> This message was sent from
>>>>>>>>> RiskIQ, and is intended only
>>>>>>>>> for the
>>>>>>>>> designated recipient(s).
>>>>>>>>> It may contain confidential or
>>>>>>>>> proprietary information
>>>>>>>>> and may be subject to
>>>>>>>>> confidentiality
>>>>>>>>> protections. If you are
>>>>>>>>> not a designated recipient,
>>>>>>>>> you may not
>>>>>>>>> review, copy or distribute
>>>>>>>>> this message. If you receive
>>>>>>>>> this in
>>>>>>>>> error, please notify the
>>>>>>>>> sender by reply e-mail and
>>>>>>>>> delete this
>>>>>>>>> message. Thank
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> you.*******************************************************************_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing
>>>>>>>>> list gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>>>>>>>>> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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
>>>>>>>>> <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
>>>>>>>>> <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
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> "Catch the Magic of Linux..."
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> Michael Peddemors, President/CEO
>>>>>>>>> LinuxMagic Inc.
>>>>>>>>> Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com
>>>>>>>>> @linuxmagic
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> A Wizard IT Company - For More Info
>>>>>>>>> http://www.wizard.ca
>>>>>>>>> "LinuxMagic" a Registered TradeMark of
>>>>>>>>> Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd.
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> 604-682-0300
>>>>>>>>> <tel:604-682-0300> Beautiful British
>>>>>>>>> Columbia, Canada
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This email and any electronic data
>>>>>>>>> contained are confidential and intended
>>>>>>>>> solely for the use of the individual
>>>>>>>>> or entity to which they are addressed.
>>>>>>>>> Please note that any views or opinions
>>>>>>>>> presented in this email are solely
>>>>>>>>> those of the author and are not
>>>>>>>>> intended to represent those of the
>>>>>>>>> company.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> _________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> _________________________________
>>>>>>>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> <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
>>>>>>> <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
>>>>>> <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
>>>> <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> _________________________________
>>>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> _________________________________
>>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _________________________________
>> Note to self: Pillage BEFORE burning.
>
> --
> 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
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> 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
>
> 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
>
> Web: www.key-systems.net / www.RRPproxy.net
> www.domaindiscount24.com / www.BrandShelter.com
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> 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
>
> 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.
>
>
>
--
--
John Bambenek
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170929/ab701587/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list