[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] WSGR Final Memorandum
Volker Greimann
vgreimann at key-systems.net
Fri Sep 29 16:03:49 UTC 2017
Depending on what level the nameserver operates and who uses it (whether
it is open to the public or internal) this could be abused by numerous
man-in-the-middle attackers. If used in a contained environment, this
should be fine, as long as you can fully trust the nameserver
administrator and whomever he uses to populate his list.
Volker
Am 29.09.2017 um 17:59 schrieb John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg:
> I'm curious as to why you think RPZ is a problem?
>
> Are organizations not allowed to filter suspected bad domains at the
> DNS level?
>
> j
>
> On 9/29/2017 10:53 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
> --
> --
>
> John Bambenek
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
--
Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Volker A. Greimann
- Rechtsabteilung -
Key-Systems GmbH
Im Oberen Werk 1
66386 St. Ingbert
Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901
Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
Email: vgreimann at key-systems.net
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/20170929/556041bc/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list