[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS Statement of Purpose
Stephanie Perrin
stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
Fri Oct 7 14:13:09 UTC 2016
Indeed, I think we should talk about contactable, not "accurate". This
was the result of similar discussions of the WHOIS review team, as I
understand it, accuracy was defined as contactable. It makes sense to
me. I realize that others want more data and more accuracy, but that is
their goal, not necessarily the goal of this pdp. The goal of privacy
advocates, or those who wish to see data protection law implemented (and
I do realize we are few in number) is to minimize the collection of
information to what is necessary.
Stephanie
On 2016-10-07 08:27, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
>
> Stephanie
>
> Here’s one we run into all the time:
>
> A lot of our clients in Northern Ireland do not view themselves as
> being part of the UK, so they’ll choose to list their country as
> “Ireland’.
>
> Is the data they supply “bad”? Strictly speaking yes
>
> Are they still reachable? Of course they are.
>
> Regards
>
> Michele
>
> --
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> http://www.blacknight.host/
>
> http://blacknight.blog/
>
> http://www.blacknight.press - get our latest news & media coverage
>
> http://www.technology.ie
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> Social: http://mneylon.social <http://mneylon.social>
>
> Random Stuff: http://michele.irish <http://michele.irish>
>
> -------------------------------
>
> 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 Stephanie
> Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
> *Date: *Friday 7 October 2016 at 00:42
> *To: *Mark Svancarek <marksv at microsoft.com>,
> "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS
> Statement of Purpose
>
> Not at all, ordinary people make mistakes all the time. However,
> rarely would this kind of mistake render the person/organization
> un-contactable, which it seems to me is the evil we are trying to
> avoid with bad data. On the other hand, criminals have a goal of
> being untraceable, so will continue to make sure they are not located,
> right?
>
> SP
>
> On 2016-10-06 19:20, Mark Svancarek wrote:
>
> There seems to be a presumption that bad data is caused entirely
> by bad people.
>
> Do we actually have data showing which fraction of bad data is
> created with criminal intent, and which fraction is just people
> being lazy or careless and then never being held accountable by
> the data actually being verified?
>
> *From:*gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Stephanie Perrin
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 6, 2016 3:09 PM
> *To:* gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS
> Statement of Purpose
>
> I agree with those pushing back on including a commitment to
> accuracy in this statement of purpose. I think there are a number
> of sound reasons for this. Those of us who push back are not
> advocating for bad data, that would be silly. What we are
> addressing is the futility of attempting to get the criminal
> element to put good data in their registration data. If we force
> them, we drive ID theft. Here are a few of my reasons:
>
> 1. Governments actually do not usually invest taxpayers money
> verifying citizen data, they provide penalties for having
> inaccurate data and leave it at that. Verifying address and phone
> number, given the mobility of the population in the countries I am
> familiar with from my past government service (US, Canada,
> Australia, New Zealand, and UK) is expensive and there is very
> little way to enforce it. This being the case, why would we force
> ICANN to do this? The cost inevitably would fall on the
> Registrars and registries, and be passed on to the end users.
>
> 2. As mentioned above, any pressure to improve data quality can
> hardly be expected to get criminals to give their accurate data,
> it will drive them to steal good data.
>
> 3. The vast majority of people are actually honest. I do realize
> that there is a high volume of cybercrime, but penalizing the
> majority of end users for the actions of a few (even if those
> actions result in a high volume of phishing and malware etc) is
> not good policy. There are other ways to catch and dump bad
> domains. Prosecution of malfeasant registrants remains a problem,
> but frankly how many can be prosecuted across borders anyway?
>
> 4. We do have questions about accuracy that we need to address,
> according to our charter. The purpose of this purpose statement
> is to boil down our business requirements for the activity in
> which we are engaged. While many actors want more accurate data,
> how to get that accuracy is so open to question that I regard its
> inclusion in the statement of purpose as setting impossible
> goals. I would be happy to revise this sentence as follows:
>
> To enable release of accurate gTLD registration data that may not
> otherwise be publicly available, under specific and explicit
> policy-defined conditions Change to
>
> To enable release of gTLD registration data that may not otherwise
> be publicly available under specific conditions defined by policy,
> and to develop mechanisms to encourage greater accuracy of data.
>
> Stephanie Perrin
>
> On 2016-10-06 16:48, Chris Pelling wrote:
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> I would actually concur with Volker. I see your point but,
> can I ask a question, the data collected cannot be proven to
> any certainty because we have nothing as the
> registry/registrar community to "check" it against. Simply
> checking say the address against a city, against a State,
> against a postal/zip code then country isnt proving the
> registrant data is correct, its simply proving that the
> registrant can open a phone book and pick an address out.
>
> Until tools are created to prove that registrant is actually
> at address X, accuracy is a rather moot point.
>
> I agree with your point about law enforcement and bad data
> being a cost to the public purse, but until the governments
> can get together and work out a solution for the data to be
> verified there is little anyone can do.
>
> Registrant giving fake address = bad data
>
> Registrant giving correct address of neighbour = bad data
>
> Registrant giving old address where previously lived = bad
> data - but at least it could be validated against old correct
> data and cross checked
>
> This list could be endless :
>
> Registrant giving correct data = good, verifiable. Maybe the
> governments can work out a solution to being able to verify
> their citizens data.
>
> I would love to find a solution that is workable and
> commercially viable, the governments and LEA can then use the
> data with some surety to its worthiness - although this is a
> totally separate topic, I would like to sit down and discuss
> it further - the governments getting together and helping this
> work.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Chris
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Nick Shorey" <nick.shorey at culture.gov.uk>
> <mailto:nick.shorey at culture.gov.uk>
> *To: *"Volker Greimann" <vgreimann at key-systems.net>
> <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
> *Cc: *"gnso-rds-pdp-wg" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Sent: *Thursday, 6 October, 2016 17:38:55
> *Subject: *Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For your review - updated RDS
> Statement of Purpose
>
> Interesting comments Volker! I guess it's all about the
> perspective you view it from I suppose. The impact of bad data
> on law enforcement investigations can also be waste of
> valuable time and cost. Except the cost comes out of of the
> public purse...
>
>
> *Nick Shorey BA(Hons) MSc.*
>
> Senior Policy Advisor | Global Internet Governance
>
> Department for Culture, Media & Sport
>
> HM Government | United Kingdom
>
> Email: nick.shorey at culture.gov.uk
> <mailto:nick.shorey at culture.gov.uk>
>
> Tel: +44 (0)7710 025 626
>
> Skype: nick.shorey
>
> Twitter: @nickshorey
>
> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin>
>
> On 6 October 2016 at 17:23, Volker Greimann
> <vgreimann at key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Arguments to the contrary tend to look like a Defense
> of Bad Data. I can't think of any reasons to defend
> bad data, unless one wants a bad database.
>
> If you want reasons, here are a few:
> 1) Cost
> 2) Waste of valuable time
> 3) Implementation nightmares
> 4) No actual standard that applies worldwide
> 5) Legacy data from legacy sources
> 6) Customer service nightmare
>
> It's reasonable to strive for perfectly accurate data,
> but accept that one will never get there. There
> should be commercially reasonable and proportionate
> methods to get as close as practically possible.
>
> One can strive for anything, but it may never be achieved,
> consuming valuable ressources on the way. How many people
> died trying to reach the south pole, the north pole, the
> peak of the Matterhorn, before someone made it. While that
> first one to make is famous now, consider the loss of life
> and ressources wasted we spent getting there.
>
> We have not (in this group) discussed data migration,
> but assuming a Garbage In, Garbage Out approach
> doesn't seem reasonable. Whether all the data is
> validated before migration, or just validated as part
> of a normal validation cycle, it needs be validated.
>
> Existing data in is the only feasible solution if you want
> a manageable transition process.
> As for validation by the road, before designing a process
> we should define who is going to have to implement it,
> process it, deal with user complaints, pay for it, etc.
> What is better data worth to those who have to pay for it?
> Are those that benefit from better data going to finance
> it (including all associated costs)? If so, let's talk....
>
> Best,
> Volker
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Carlton Samuels
> <carlton.samuels at gmail.com
> <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> +1.
>
> Not to make too fine a point of it. But the EWG
> was tasked to re-imagine an RDS. If this PDP is
> tasked to build on the works of EWG maybe it'd be
> useful to re-visit certain ideas we now hold as
> verities.
>
> -Carlton
>
>
>
> ==============================
> /Carlton A Samuels/
> /Mobile: 876-818-1799 <tel:876-818-1799>
> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment &
> Turnaround/
> =============================
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Holly Raiche
> <h.raiche at internode.on.net
> <mailto:h.raiche at internode.on.net>> wrote:
>
>
> Folks
>
> Maybe we need to back up a bit and go back to
> the Charter and what we are supposed to be
> doing. Let me quote directly from it:
>
> First - background: Quoting the Charter on the
> Board decision to launch this PDP:
>
> /On 26 May, 2015, the ICANN Board passed
> a resolution adopting that Process Framework
> and reaffirming its 2012 request for a
> Board - initiated PDP to define the purpose of
> collecting, maintaining and providing access
> to gTLD registration data, and to consider
> safeguards for protecting data, using the
> recommendations in the EWG’s Final Report as
> an input to, and, if appropriate, as the
> foundation for a new gTLD policy/
>
>
>
>
> Later - what The Charter tasked this Working
> Group with:
>
>
>
>
> /As part of its Phase 1 deliberations, the PDP
> WG should work to reach consensus
> recommendations by considering, at a minimum,
> the following complex and inter-related
> questions:/
>
> /// Users/Purposes: Who should have access to
> gTLD registration data and why?/
>
> /// Gated Access: What steps should be taken
> to control data access for each user/purpose?/
>
> /// Data Accuracy: What steps should be taken
> to improve data accuracy?/
>
> /// Data Elements: What data should be
> collected, stored, and disclosed?/
>
> /// Privacy: What steps are needed to protect
> data and privacy?/
>
> /// Coexistence: What steps should be taken
> to enable next-generation RDS coexistence
> with and replacement of the legacy WHOIS system?/
>
> ///Compliance: What steps are needed to
> enforce these policies?/
>
> /// System Model:What system requirements
> must be satisfied by any next-generation
> RDS implementation?/
>
> /// Cost: What costs will be incurred and how
> must they be covered?/
>
> /// Benefits: What benefits will be achieved
> and how will they be measured?/
>
> /// Risks: What risks do stakeholders face
> and how will they be reconciled?/
>
>
>
>
> So accuracy’s there - along with a lot of
> other issues. That is not saying that accuracy
> is not covered in existing requirements on
> registries/registrars. But it is giving a
> broader meaning to RDS - i.e., it’s not just
> about collection, maintenance and access to
> data; it’s also about safeguards, etc - using
> the EWG work.
>
> So thanks Rob. It’s a bit premature to rule
> issues out when they are well and truly on our
> table.
>
>
>
>
> Holly
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6 Oct 2016, at 6:37 am, Rod Rasmussen
> <rrasmussen at infoblox.com
> <mailto:rrasmussen at infoblox.com>> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Gotta chime in here, since the EWG
> provided a lot of thinking on this issue.
> If you haven’t already, please review the
> EWG report sections on data accuracy and
> also the concept of data validators and
> their relationship to the RDS. For
> example, I would note that a
> well-provisioned RDS would be able to
> provide some sort of validation checks
> against existing data in the use case of
> trying to prevent impersonation (a form of
> accuracy) of an existing registrant (a big
> brand like Facebook for instance). Another
> concept we found very important in the EWG
> is the idea of creating a contact data set
> tied to a contact ID that is portable
> between registrars and registries. This
> provides for the purpose-based contacts we
> talk about at great length in the report.
> It also is key for addressing some of the
> fundamental operational issues that lead
> to inaccurate, out-of-date data at various
> registrars. If you have a change in your
> contact information (a new e-mail for
> instance) and hold multiple roles in
> conjunction with many domains, you have a
> real challenge making updates throughout
> the universe of your domain names. Using
> a data validator and then acting via the
> RDS, when you make a change to your
> contact info, that automatically can be
> reflected in all domains you are
> associated with and thus improve accuracy
> tremendously. Those are just a couple
> examples of how an RDS can be involved in
> dealing with accuracy issues and represent
> many of the concepts you can address once
> you look beyond the current paradigm of
> registrar controlled contact information
> anchored specifically to individual domain
> names. Accuracy in the “generic” system
> (including registries, registrars, RDS,
> validators, some other group we haven’t
> thought of yet) is definitely in-scope.
> How that is done can take many forms and
> could have different roles played by
> different participants in the entire
> ecosystem.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rod
>
> On Oct 5, 2016, at 10:36 AM,
> benny at nordreg.se
> <mailto:benny at nordreg.se> wrote:
>
> But the data accuracy can’t be done in
> RDS, the accuracy is done on a
> registrar level when collecting data.
>
> RDS shall under no circumstances alter
> any information received from registry
> / registrars and showing any different
> info than what is collected on that level.
>
> WG can look at what accuracy they want
> registrars to do yes, but RDS doesn’t
> do anything.
>
> --
>
> Med vänliga hälsningar / Kind Regards
> / Med vennlig hilsen
>
>
> Benny Samuelsen
> Registry Manager - Domainexpert
>
> Nordreg AB - ICANN accredited registrar
>
> IANA-ID: 638
>
> Phone: +46.42197080 <tel:%2B46.42197080>
> Direct: +47.32260201 <tel:%2B47.32260201>
> Mobile: +47.40410200 <tel:%2B47.40410200>
>
> *From:*<gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>>
> on behalf of "Metalitz, Steven"
> <met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>>
> *Date:*Wednesday, 5 October 2016 at 19:32
> *To:*'Marika Konings'
> <marika.konings at icann.org
> <mailto:marika.konings at icann.org>>,
> Volker Greimann
> <vgreimann at key-systems.net
> <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>>,
> "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>"
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
> *Subject:*Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For
> your review - updated RDS Statement of
> Purpose
>
> Volker, what is the basis for your
> assertion that “data will be presented
> "as is" in this system, with no
>
> presumption of any prior cleanup work”?
>
> That statement will be true if we
> ultimately conclude that the current
> system is adequate and that we do not
> recommend establishment of a new RDS.
> However, if we do recommend a new
> system, then improvements to data
> accuracy are very much on the table,
> as the charter provision quoted by
> Marika indicates.
>
> Steve Metalitz
>
> *From:*gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org]*On
> Behalf Of*Marika Konings
> *Sent:*Wednesday, October 05, 2016
> 12:53 PM
> *To:*Volker Greimann;
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> *Subject:*Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] For
> your review - updated RDS Statement of
> Purpose
>
> Volker, please note that the PDP WG
> Charter
> (seehttps://community.icann.org/x/E4xlAw)
> includes the following question:
>
> **
>
> */AspartofitsPhase1deliberations,/*/thePDPWGshouldworktoreach
> consensusrecommendations
> byconsidering,*ataminimum*,
> thefollowingcomplexandinter-related
> questions:/
>
> /(…..)/
>
> ·*/Data Accuracy:/*/Whatstepsshould
> betakentoimprovedataaccuracy?/
>
> /(……)/
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> On 05/10/16 05:58,
> "gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on
> behalf of Volker Greimann
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20Volker%20Greimann>"
> <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on
> behalf of vgreimann at key-systems.net
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20vgreimann at key-systems.net>>
> wrote:
>
> I would move to strike all
> references to data quality altogether from
>
> this document, e.g. "current",
> "accurate" etc.
>
> These are already required by
> existing policies and agreements and do
>
> not have to be referenced again at
> this point. We should focus on having
>
> to reflect the data as provided by
> the RNH at this stage, not make any
>
> presumptions about its quality.
>
> After all, data will be presented
> "as is" in this system, with no
>
> presumption of any prior cleanup work.
>
> Best,
>
> Volker
>
> >> THE purpose of the
> "Registration Data Service" (hereafter
> referred to
>
> >> as
>
> >> "RDS") is to manage authorised
> parties' access to information about
>
> >> [gTLD Domain Names, gTLD
> Nameservers, gTLD Registries and gTLD
>
> >> Registrars]
>
> >>
>
> >> Purpose 3(a/b) are possible use
> cases, not Purposes as such
>
> >>
>
> >> "Accurate" is definitely not a
> term to use if we ever expect to finish
>
> >> - "Current" would be more
> accurate (sic) / appropriate.
>
> > Agreed, with one minor suggestion:
>
> >
>
> > "access to information about
> generic top-level domain registries,
> registrars, names, and name servers."
>
> >
>
> > Scott
>
> >
> _______________________________________________
>
> > 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:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901>
>
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851>
>
> 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:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901>
>
> Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851>
>
> Email:vgreimann at key-systems.net
> <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
>
> Web:www.key-systems.net
> <http://www.key-systems.net/>/www.RRPproxy.net
> <http://www.rrpproxy.net/>
>
> www.domaindiscount24.com
> <http://www.domaindiscount24.com/>/www.BrandShelter.com
> <http://www.brandshelter.com/>
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our
> fan community on Facebook and stay
> updated:
>
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
> <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 -
> Saarbruecken
>
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>
> www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu/>
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is
> intended only for the person to whom
> it is addressed. Furthermore it is not
> permitted to publish any content of
> this email. You must not use,
> disclose, copy, print or rely on this
> e-mail. If an addressing or
> transmission error has misdirected
> this e-mail, kindly notify the author
> by replying to this e-mail or
> contacting us by telephone.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901>
>
> Fax.:+49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851>
>
> 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:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20901>
>
> Fax.:+49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851
> <tel:%2B49%20%280%29%206894%20-%209396%20851>
>
> Email:vgreimann at key-systems.net <mailto:vgreimann at key-systems.net>
>
>
>
> Web:www.key-systems.net <http://www.key-systems.net> /www.RRPproxy.net <http://www.RRPproxy.net>
>
> www.domaindiscount24.com <http://www.domaindiscount24.com> /www.BrandShelter.com <http://www.BrandShelter.com>
>
>
>
> Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:
>
> www.facebook.com/KeySystems
> <http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>
>
> www.twitter.com/key_systems
> <http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>
>
>
>
> CEO: Alexander Siffrin
>
> Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken
>
> V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534
>
>
>
> Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP
>
> www.keydrive.lu <http://www.keydrive.lu>
>
>
>
> This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>
> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org <mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20161007/f3436f89/attachment.html>
More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg
mailing list