[RDS-WHOIS2-RT] Report on public session

[Alan Greenberg]

Volker, regarding 4.7, it was discussed on today's plenary call and 
the Action Item out of the discussion was:
rec. 4.7: Susan and Lili to clarify rec 4.7 to indicate the audit 
would apply only in cases where there is a pattern of failure to 
validate as required by the RAA
I believe that this was in line with Michele's comment from the floor.

Alan

At 09/07/2018 11:47 AM, Volker Greimann wrote:
>The reason why 4.7. is received in such an emotional way is because 
>it is absolutely unworkable and it ties certain facts of doing 
>business with penalties that will result in weeks of wasted 
>man-hours. There is absolutely no feasible way of preventing 
>inaccurate whois requests as a registrar, yet you propose that 
>registrars receiving such complaints (which in no way has any 
>indication on whether they are compliant with the RAA or not) should 
>be targeted in one of the most onerous, wasteful and time-consuming 
>processes ICANN compliance has to offer. The recommendation as it is 
>written will rightfully cause this reaction in any registrar. It 
>needs to go, quietly and peacefully.
>
>As for Kathys comment, the contactibility of the registrant is being 
>ensured by the verification requirement of either telephone number 
>or email address in the whois as it required a protive response. It 
>is therefore impossible to "just copy any public contact info 
>crawling from the internet" and achieve the verification result as 
>the registrar will shut down the domain after 15 days if no positive 
>response to the verification request is received. As for the other 
>data, it is correct that there only is a format check envisioned in 
>the RAA and such databased can be (and in some cases are being) used 
>to create compliant registrations, but there simply is no feasible 
>way to stop that. It seems you are misunderstanding the intent of 
>the differentiation between verification and validation. 
>Verification means checking that the registrant is reachable through 
>this contact; validation just checks if the data is formatted 
>correctly, nothing more. Validated data does not guarantee that this 
>data belongs to the registrant (or anyone at all), it is merely a 
>sanity check to prevent blank or malformed data fields, which seems 
>to have been an issue in the past. It thereby improves overall data 
>quality, but not necessarily accuracy. Accuracy is improved only by 
>the verification requirement.
>
>Best,
>
>Volker
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rds-whois2-rt/attachments/20180709/b1d93989/attachment.html>