[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] WSGR Final Memorandum
Volker Greimann
vgreimann at key-systems.net
Fri Sep 29 15:53:33 UTC 2017
This sounds nefarious. Wasn't this form of traffic-hijacking what DNSSEC
was designed against? It seems to me that there is very high potential
for abuse if this becomes a standard.
Volker
Am 29.09.2017 um 17:48 schrieb Michele Neylon - Blacknight:
>
> Volker
>
> If you don’t like that you’ll absolutely hate RPZ ☺
>
> https://dnsrpz.info/
>
> Allison’s explanation is consistent with what we see every day.
>
> If, for example, you want to send email to the Microsoft network any
> “new” IP won’t be trusted immediately and mail will get backlogged.
>
> We drop over 90% of inbound SMTP connections due to a number of
> different factors – again this is fairly normal.
>
> 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> on behalf of Volker
> Greimann <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
> *Date: *Friday 29 September 2017 at 16:30
> *To: *allison nixon <elsakoo at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *RDS PDP WG <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] WSGR Final Memorandum
>
> 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
>
> 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>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> "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
>
>
>
> --
>
> _________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> --
>
> _________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
>
> _________________________________
> 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 <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.
--
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170929/27741c9b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list