[NCAP-Discuss] Reminder - Please review the Data Sensitivity Study

Wed Jan 12 12:19:29 UTC 2022

Patrik,

Thanks for the response.  I actually agree with much of what you are saying.

The issue is, for the reasons you've articulated,  that such a definitive
statement doesn't age well.

We simply don't know what the DNS traffic patterns will look like in 4-5
years time when future-ICANN starts conducting collision analysis of
applied-for strings.

 It would seem prudent to allow for more than one approach

Tom

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022, 11:06 AM Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se> wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> The problem has always been guessing what the future will look like.
> Regardless of how much a certain string (for example) is analysed, there
> will always be unknown unknowns that pop up. SSAC have already described
> this a number of times, and because of this I feel we have to think of two
> different things here, but first, lets talk about what we mean by
> "delegation".
>
> In the context of name collisions we are using this in the DNS sense. Do
> not mix this up by overloading this with the business sense, i.e., the
> string has been allocated to the applicant. All of the NCAP work is
> pre-allocation. This is critical to understand.
>
> Second, it’s not about recursive resolver data. It’s about a full picture
> of the data from the infrastructure. Over the past decade one change that
> has happened in the infrastructure is the presence of recursive resolver.
> So, our critical result is that we need data at the root servers to see a
> full picture because this one change has shown that changes to the
> infrastructure change the data picture. We don’t know what changes might
> come about in the future. We can certainly speak more about the ones we
> know about today, but we don’t know what we don’t know.
>
> Third, yes, privacy and legal concerns exist today. These are additional
> factors on top of the technical one that will be challenging to resolve, if
> at all. Useful to note but not material to the technical decision at hand.
>
> At the same time, the only thing we can do is to do an analysis based on
> data at hand, that give ok/nok before allocation. A different thing is to
> ensure there are enough data collection, safe guards, and what not (both
> technical and legal/contractual) so that if unknown things happens, actions
> can still be taken.
>
> Remember Donald Rumsfeld that said:
>
> > There are known knowns. There are things we know we know.
> >
> > We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are
> some things we do not know.
> >
> > But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't
> know.
>
>    Patrik
>
> On 5 Jan 2022, at 20:54, Tom Barrett via NCAP-Discuss wrote:
>
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> > I was unable to attend today's meeting due to receiving zoom error 1001
> via various devices and browsers.
> >
> > I wanted to make just one observation and suggestion. I'm having some
> difficulty with the definitiveness of this conclusion:
> > " A complete and accurate risk assessment of a string’s name collision
> potential cannot be determined prior to the string's delegation."
> >
> > I can appreciate the challenge of currently accessing public recursive
> resolver data as summarized here : "in part due to legal and privacy
> concerns, it is likely that public resolver data will be even more obscure
> or scarce in the future.".
> >
> > However, since this is not a technical issue but rater a "speculative"
> > commercial issue, it appears it might be a solvable problem that could
> be addressed well before ICANN starts accepting applications for the next
> round (~in 4-5 years).
> >
> > What are your thoughts about qualifying your conclusion somewhere along
> the lines of:
> > " A complete and accurate risk assessment of a string’s name collision
> potential cannot be determined prior to the string's delegation, unless
> ICANN is able to generate or obtain public recursive resolver data prior to
> the next round of new gTLDs."
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <
> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> > Virus-free.
> > www.avg.com
> > <
> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 8:12 AM Thomas, Matthew via NCAP-Discuss <
> > ncap-discuss at icann.org> wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Happy New Year!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> As promised here is a gentle reminder for the group to review the Data
> >> Sensitivity Study [1] (PDF version also attached here). We will be
> >> discussing the document at the next NCAP DG call on 1/12/2022. It is
> >> important we reach a final version near the 12th so we can release the
> >> document for public comment in conjunction with the already reviewed
> CORP,
> >> HOME, and MAIL case study.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Matt Thomas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sLPrBn8T6ym7gumySHeWG9THSGSRoEeKldv3uRMMy6Y/edit?usp=sharing
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NCAP-Discuss mailing list
> >> NCAP-Discuss at icann.org
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncap-discuss
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> >> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
> accordance
> >> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy)
> and
> >> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You
> can
> >> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> >> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> >> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Barrett
> > President
> > EnCirca, Inc
> > +1.781.942.9975 (office)
> > 400 W. Cummings Park, Suite 1725
> > Woburn, MA 01801 USA
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NCAP-Discuss mailing list
> > NCAP-Discuss at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ncap-discuss
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20220112/c07e3c88/attachment.html>