[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Proposed Definition/Background for Authoritative

[Michael D. Palage]

Hello All,

 

While I will work with the smaller group on a more concise definition of
"Authoritative," I wanted to provide these broad brush strokes on my
perspective of this concept to the entire group.

 

Authoritative Data used in the context of the RDS WG is intend to define the
concept of which data shall deemed to be controlling(authoritative) when
confronted with data elements that are NOT identical (i.e. are
inconsistent).

 

Currently there are multiple parties in the domain name eco system that
possess (disseminate/make available) Whois data records associated with a
domain name, some under ICANN contract (registries and registrars) and those
that are not (i.e. third party proxy agents, historical whois aggregators,
etc.)

 

The "authoritativeness" of all Whois data elements are NOT necessary treated
equal.  The Registry is absolutely Authoritative in connection with the name
servers published in the zone file. However, inconsistencies in other data
elements can and do happen, i.e. Registrars that update domain name Whois
locally without timely updating the information at the Registry, historical
thin/thick registries; Registrants that provide false and inaccurate
information; Registrant data that unintentional because outdate/inaccurate,
etc.

 

Standard Registry Agreements have legal provisions in their RRA which
dictate which data will control (i.e. be authoritative). See for example the
following provision from VeriSign's RRA: "2.11. Time. Registrar agrees that
in the event of any dispute concerning the time of the entry of a domain
name registration into the registry database, the time shown in the Verisign
records shall control."

 

In making a legal determination as to the "authoritativeness" of Whois data
elements there are some rebuttable presumptions. Per the standard RRA, there
should be a presumption of authoritativeness of the data in the Registry
database.  This presumption of authoritativeness can be challenged using
data residing in the Registrar database in certain circumstances. 

 

Regarding third party aggregated historical Whois data elements, there is a
widely accepted presumption within the industry that this data is
historically accurate in the absent of any conflicting Registry/Registrar
authoritative data. 

 

So for those members looking for a nice neat definition of "authoritative"
sorry for this rambling soliloquy.  

 

I would also encourage WG members to read this currently pending ICANN
reconsideration request dealing with the "authoritativeness" of whois data
elements, see
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/reconsideration-17-1-smith-request-201
7-03-16-en 

 

Best regards,

 

Michael

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20170404/c3afa811/attachment.html>