<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body dir="auto">
<div>Stephanie</div>
<div>In simple terms - unless you have the "key" you can't really access much about a domain with another registrar </div>
<div>(Speaking about ccTLDs where Whois is often gated)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And even if you can access data it's logged that your registrar did stuff </div>
<div>Assuming you're using EPP etc</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Michele</div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div>------------------------</div>
Mr. Michele Neylon
<div>Blacknight</div>
<div><a href="http://Blacknight.tel">http://Blacknight.tel</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Via iPhone so excuse typos and brevity</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On 16 Feb 2014, at 08:43, "Stephanie Perrin" <<a href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca">stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>That does raise interesting questions. First one I have, is do all registrars get to look at all data, or do they only get to look at a particular transaction? I would hope the latter, because that would be compliant with data protection law, if they
get to look at all data that would not, in my view, be compliant. It would have been easy to engineer a consent mechanism in there to get around this problem, which would be normal in other commercial transactions, and would also perform a security function.
<div>The second question of course, remains begging in my view, with respect to the EWG work. How on earth are we going to accredit actors to look at the ARDS? Do all registrars get to look at all data all the time, if not how is it going to be policed? How
many miscreant registrars are there out there?</div>
<div>AS always, pardon the naivete of my questions. </div>
<div>Stephanie<br>
<div>
<div>On 2014-02-16, at 8:29 AM, Mike O'Connor wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
thanks Stephanie and Greg for kicking this thread off so well.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>let me add another dimension to the discussion — i’m going to combine a couple of fuzzy terms to coin a new one and see if it sticks. “Policy Architecture” </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>i’m involved in several WG’s that touch (or depend on) Whois, or its replacement. the most interesting puzzler is the IRTP-C PDP, which introduced the notion of “inter REGISTRANT transfer” to the existing inter REGISTRAR transfer policy. IRTP-C is now
in the implementation process and there are turning out to be a lot of dependencies in there. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>one of the fundamental notions that IRTP-C introduced was the idea that registrars need determine whether the transfer is just inter-registrar, or whether it’s also inter-registrant. the question is, how will registrars determine whether the registrant
is changing or not? one answer, which works in thick Whois environments, is to go look at whois data at the registry and see if registrant data is changing. if it is, then it’s an inter-REGISTRANT transfer and new safeguards apply. if not, it’s just an
inter-registrar transfer.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>when we wrote that section of the report, we knew that it was hard to do that — but we were (correctly) counting on some things changing fairly soon. sure enough, the Thick Whois PDP has just been approved by the Board, which means that “go look at registry
data” option will exist for all TLDs. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>the puzzler for me is who looks after these meta-level dependencies? what if Thick Whois had gone the other way? what if the EWG process concludes that registrars can’t look at that data? who minds that “architectural” framework in the policy-making
process?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>mikey</div>
<div><br>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none; ">PHONE:
651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: <a href="http://www.haven2.com/">www.haven2.com</a>, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)</span>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnso-ssr mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnso-ssr@icann.org">Gnso-ssr@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssr">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssr</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br>
<span>Gnso-ssr mailing list</span><br>
<span><a href="mailto:Gnso-ssr@icann.org">Gnso-ssr@icann.org</a></span><br>
<span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssr">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ssr</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>