<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I agree with the position that the core question is: WHAT/WHICH
fields need to be authoritative?<br>
<br>
The WHO, <i>and especially the HOW for verification</i>, are other
discussions, mostly involving a discussion between ICANN,
Registries, and Registrars. <br>
<br>
Sam L. <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/5/2017 1:30 PM, John Bambenek via
gnso-rds-pdp-wg wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:ebde5b46-a2aa-be78-181d-bcec1a4f6885@bambenekconsulting.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<p>Isn't the question of WHAT is authoritative the question here?
WHO is authoritative is another discussion.</p>
<p>My view is that authoritative means what is either what is
entered by the domain owner (or given via proxy for whois
privacy, which should be free to all entities) or an identical
copy of it kept in sync with any changes made by the owner as
they are made. In so far as "accurate" data is required, it
should be after verification of the data by the consumer for
whatever fields have to go through verification.<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
< rest deleted> <br>
</body>
</html>