<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">@All,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Here follows an structured response to all of the December 12 proposed WHOIS clarifications. I divided them in four categories:</div><div class="">- Actual clarifications, marked in green.</div><div class="">- Optional enhancements (format changes that are optional in nature so they don't require effort from registries that do not want to make them, but allowing the ones who do to implement such improvements). Also marked in green. </div><div class="">- WHOIS format changes: changes to either output, format or semantics. These are changes that I think as permissible under the agreement, but not if ICANN call them clarifications; they should be called format changes in order to account for their real impact and provide ample time for registries to implement. It also should be noted that since they are not consensus policies, these changes might also be regulated by RRAs between registries and registrars, so beyond some reasonable time to implement (135 days is possible a starting point since it's the number for RDAP), it might also require to fit into the schedule of allowed changes to registry systems. 180 days is a condition that is usual in RRAs, so registries with such limitations should be able to get longer exemptions from ICANN. Marked in yellow.</div><div class="">- Registry change: changes that imply registry system data model or behaviour changes. Marked in red. For those changes there are no other venues than consensus policies and RA amendments, they simply do not fit in anything allowed by specification 4, and are likely to be quashed in the agreement and bylaws defined ways. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Some recommendations have more than one part so a few of them are marked in more than one column.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The registrar-only recommendations are listed in the workbook but not currently commented, but my guess is they will have a similar distribution of clarifications, simple changes and changes requiring a complete revamp of the system. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Rubens</div><div class=""><a href="http://NIC.br" class="">NIC.br</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>