RE: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Definition V4.3

[Joe St Sauver <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#I've pulled Randy's suggested bullet to address routing ("dispersing 
#network nodes across a wide number of consumer grade autonomous 
#systems") and added it to the mix.  New version posted to the wiki.
#
#https://st.icann.org/pdp-wg-ff/index.cgi?initial_draft_definitions

The non-varying backend server "proxy targets" are still listed as fluxing
without evidence that this happens.

The exclusion of inaccurate whois information still is shown
even though that's a scope-of-work issue, not properly part of 
a definition of fastflux

The exclusion of criminal intent still is shown, even though
that's also a scope-of-work issue, and not properly part of 
a definition of fastflux.

The "exclusion of criminal intent item" it is also just plain wrong 
in that it says 'the definition of "criminal" presents problems for 
our analysis because it varies depending on point of view." Legality
isn't subjective, like the proper amount of salt to add to a stew
or one's preferences in art, it is an objective/factual matter: 
something is illegal or it isn't illegal in a particular jurisidction.

And given that ICANN was created through an MOU with the United
States Department of Commerce, and is based in Marina del Rey, and
noting that it has no international diplomatic status that would 
exempt it from US laws, I would suggest that *at a minimum,* United
States law would be relevant to its operations as an objective
(rather than subjective) matter.

Regards,

Joe

Disclaimer: all opinions strictly my own.