RE: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Term of Reference 5: Precis of existing positions

["Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Just to rephrase something you had below then:

"There is strong support that more work needs to be done on the issue of
whether there should be a policy to ensure non-discriminatory access to
registry data that is made available to third parties."

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq. 
Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & Business Development 

NeuStar, Inc. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Liz Williams [mailto:liz.williams@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 10:52 AM
To: Neuman, Jeff
Cc: PDPfeb06
Subject: Re: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Term of Reference 5: Precis of existing
positions

Hi Jeff

Everyone said yes there should be more work done on 5b but it was not  
specified WHAT work which was why I've seeded the questions.

Liz
.....................................................

Liz Williams
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN - Brussels
+32 2 234 7874 tel
+32 2 234 7848 fax
+32 497 07 4243 mob




On 18 Jan 2007, at 16:39, Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> Liz,
>
>
>
> I think we need to go back and analyze the results on 5(b).  For  
> example, I thought the NCUC was saying that more work needed to be  
> done but not "yes" to there should be "nondiscriminatory access".   
> In fact, there statement was pretty clear that they thought there  
> shouldn't be.  In other words, for 5(b) what were people saying yes  
> to.  Was it:
>
>
>
> 1)       Yes, there should be nondiscriminatory access or
>
> 2)       Yes, more work needs to be done.
>
>
>
> More comments to follow.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman, Esq.
> Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services  & Business Development
> NeuStar, Inc.
> From: owner-pdp-pcceg-feb06@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-pdp-pcceg- 
> feb06@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Liz Williams
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 8:01 AM
> To: PDPfeb06
> Subject: [pdp-pcceg-feb06] Term of Reference 5: Precis of existing  
> positions
>
>
>
> Colleagues
>
>
>
> I have been following the traffic on TOR 5 since the conference  
> call on Tuesday.  I don't know whether everyone is up to speed on  
> the views of each constituency and I have included a summary of the  
> positions so far.  We are working towards determining where there  
> is some level of agreement on two remaining questions which will be  
> discussed in the 23 Jan and 6 Feb conference calls.
>
>
>
> TERM OF REFERENCE 5
>
> Uses of registry data
>
>
>
> 5a Examine whether or not there should be a policy regarding the  
> use of registry data for purposes other than for which it was  
> collected, and if so, what the elements of that policy should be.
>
>
>
> Policy Recommendation Q:  There should be a policy regarding the  
> use of registry data [which includes traffic data] for purposes  
> other than that for which it was
>
> collected.
>
>
>
> Yes: Registrar, NCUC, IPC, BC, ISP, RC
>
> No:  Registry
>
>
>
> Clear support for a policy regarding the use of registry data.
>
>
>
> The outstanding question is what the elements of that policy should  
> be beyond that which is already contained in the existing registry  
> contracts.  Please refer to the provision in the .org agreement as  
> a starting point.
>
>
>
> 3. 1(f) Traffic Data. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude  
> Registry Operator from making commercial use of, or collecting,  
> traffic data regarding domain names or non-existent domain names  
> for purposes such as, without limitation, the determination of the  
> availability and health of the Internet, pinpointing specific  
> points of failure, characterizing attacks and misconfigurations,  
> identifying compromised networks and hosts and promoting the sale  
> of domain names, provided however, that such use does not permit  
> Registry Operator to disclose domain name registrant or end-user  
> information or other Personal Data as defined in Section 3.1(c)(ii)  
> that it collects through providing domain name registration  
> services for any purpose not otherwise authorized by this  
> agreement. In this regard, in the event the TLD registry is a  
> "thick" registry model, the traffic data that may be accessible to  
> and used by Registry Operator shall be limited to the data that  
> would be accessible to a registry operated under a "thin" registry  
> model. The process for the introduction of new Registry Services  
> shall not apply to such traffic data. Nothing contained in this  
> section 3.1(f) shall be deemed to constitute consent or  
> acquiescence by ICANN to an introduction by Registry Operator of a  
> service employing a universal wildcard function. To the extent that  
> traffic data subject to this provision is made available, access  
> shall be on terms that are nondiscriminatory.
>
>
>
> 5b. Determine whether any policy is necessary to ensure non- 
> discriminatory access to registry data that is made available to  
> third parties.
>
>
>
> Policy Recommendation R:   There should be a policy to ensure non- 
> discriminatory access to registry data that is made available, but  
> that policy should include safeguards on protection against misuse  
> of the data. [and that the work needs to be completed by the TF]
>
>
>
> Yes: Registrar, NCUC, IPC, BC, ISP, RC
>
> No:  Registry
>
>
>
> There is support for a policy to ensure non-discriminatory access  
> to registry data that is made available to third parties.
>
>
>
> Examples of elements of that policy should be equal pricing and  
> equal treatment on requests for data [not dissimilar to the  
> approach taken in the telecommunications world on incumbent  
> interconnection pricing]
>
>
>
> The safeguards on protection against misuse of the data need  
> further examination and require suggestions from the TF members.
>
>
>
> In preparation for our conference call on 23 January, please  
> provide further suggestions about possible policy elements on 5a  
> and 5b.
>
>
>
> Kind regards.
>
>
>
> Liz
>
>
>
> .....................................................
>
>
>
> Liz Williams
>
> Senior Policy Counselor
>
> ICANN - Brussels
>
> +32 2 234 7874 tel
>
> +32 2 234 7848 fax
>
> +32 497 07 4243 mob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>