<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>I agree. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">It seems to me that one side is asserting the need for anti-abuse, reputation, investigation, etc. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Others seem to assert that such a purpose is not included within the technical aspects of dns management. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Seems to me that while such matters are perhaps tangent to the technical workings of the DNS, they are in fact necessary for the health of the entire system. A correctly functioning DNS system is worthless if there is no means of preserving trust and dissuading abuse. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Sort of like saying a speed limit is not required for the technical use of highways. Right....</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">And we can always recommend that ICANN improve its mission statement so that the apparent disagreement can be dissipated. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">So my suggestion is that whenever purpose becomes an issue we add a comment describing how the underlying purpose/mission statement should be altered. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Can we move forward please?<br><br>Sincerely,<div>Paul Keating, Esq.</div></div><div><br>On Oct 4, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Chuck <<a href="mailto:consult@cgomes.com">consult@cgomes.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal">Well said Greg.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Chuck<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org">mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Greg Shatan<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, October 03, 2017 8:16 PM<br><b>To:</b> John Bambenek <<a href="mailto:jcb@bambenekconsulting.com">jcb@bambenekconsulting.com</a>>; Rob Golding <<a href="mailto:rob.golding@astutium.com">rob.golding@astutium.com</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Reputation systems are not just nice to have (was Re: What we want redux)<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class="MsoNormal">Let's remember we're all part of an ecosystem, with valuable roles to play (even the lawyers and policy people). We should make genuine efforts to understand each other's experiences, knowledge and perspectives. This jousting is probably not the fastest or easiest way to go about it. Thinking you know someone else's job better than they do isn't either. Trying to score points to advance a policy objective at the expense of getting at the facts isn't either. We should treat this more like an investigation and less like a litigation.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal">And I don't mean an investigation of each other -- a common investigation.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal">Greg Shatan<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:45 PM John Bambenek via gnso-rds-pdp-wg <<a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in"><p class="MsoNormal">I may be operating under a bad assumption, if so, please correct me. My understanding is that the registries and registrars contribution to anti-abuse is in the response to complaints others make. Are there proactive measures you take against abusive domain names I should be aware of? Do you suspend abusive domains, those engaged in brand impersonation, or otherwise illegal activities based on your own initiative?<br><br>Sent from my iPad<br><br>On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:50 PM, Rob Golding <<a href="mailto:rob.golding@astutium.com" target="_blank">rob.golding@astutium.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>>> And yet we are told by<br>>> those who do NOT work in this field and do NOT contribute to solving<br>>> this problem, that we don't need this information.<br>><br>> A number of those contributing to the discussion are registrars and web-hosts, who deal every day with abuse issues, so very much are the people who deal with "solving this problem" (and are also those telling you that WHOIS data contributes to abuse against real-people rather than abstracts)<br>><br>>> As far as I can tell, only the anti-abuse people have even proposed a<br>>> compromise... whois privacy for free.<br>><br>> Some registrars have offered this for years, although now ICANN thinks it should control/set policy/tax that kind of service it may not remain 'free' for long, and certainly isn't free to the registrar to provide (and still leaves the GDPR issue over escrow outstanding)<br>><br>><br>> Rob<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br>> <a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list<br><a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org">gnso-rds-pdp-wg@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg</a></span></div></blockquote></body></html>