[Rt4-whois] FW: Adobe Connect - Chat Transcript from ICANN Meeting 43 - La Paz A

Tue Mar 13 00:55:26 UTC 2012

Dear Alice,

Thanks, you're always helpful. I believe the session transcription
could also be useful to us. I forgot to save it, but I believe you
have it with you.

Thanks in advance,

Omar

2012/3/12 Alice Jansen <alice.jansen at icann.org>:
> Dear Review Team Members,
>
>
> Please find below content of the Adobe room chat box.
> Lutz was in the room interacting with remote participants.
> Lutz has also me asked me to email you a message:
> JUst an "internal" comment. German LAE asks how "proxy/privacy" can be use
> to protect identiies in witness protections programms. I urged them to
> send in a comment ....
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kind regards
>
> Alice
>
>
> Quote:
> On 3/12/12 6:04 PM, "Alice Jansen" <alice.jansen at icann.org> wrote:
>
>>  Alice Jansen:Welcome to the WHOIS Policy Review Team Session. The
>>session will begin shortly. Your comments and questions will be read in
>>the room if asked.
>>  Rob Golding (othello):? 6. measure reduction in "unreachable domain
>>names" - why does a *domain* have to reachable - or do you means
>>something else ?
>>  Olof Nordling:@Rob - will read out your question in the Q&A, if you so
>>wish.
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@olof - please - just to clarify the slide - i
>>*think* she meant where the registrant isnt (obviously) contactable, but
>>thats not how it was worded
>>  Olof Nordling:@Rob - I am confident you are correct in that assumption
>>- rather an edit of the slide to be suggested, thus.
>>  gpmgroup:Wby doesn't ICANN offer an incentive to have open & accurate
>>WHOIS data?
>>  gpmgroup:Why
>>  Olof Nordling:@gpmgroup - happy to read that one out in the Q&A, OK?
>>  gpmgroup:thanks perhaps I should word it a little less ambigiously
>>  Olof Nordling:listening;-)
>>  Olof Nordling:listening;-)
>>  Omar Kaminski:Feedback from Twitter: "@miltonmueller: Whois Review team
>>concludes that most consumers have never heard of Whois. So much for the
>>argument that it promotes consumer trust"
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@gpmgroup there are lots of reasons for
>>why people don't want all there date public
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:data
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:Still the whois service for .com and .net
>>and others like them are a shame and not trustworthy
>>  Rob Golding (othello):? are there recommendations on Criminalising
>>misuses of WHOIS data - it took less than 3 days from a new registration
>>before spam started arriving at the unique email address I used on the
>>domain registration - having such information freely available and public
>>is not just a privacy concern but a real issue to normal users who dont
>>need a supplier of dodgy pharmaceuticals
>>  gpmgroup:I agree Benny but if there was more incentives then it would
>>be an easy (dristibuted) way of cleaning up a large data set
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Benny - each registrar implenets their own whois
>>system for com/net as it's thin whois - there are many pros and cons to
>>that - pros being keepingyoru client data away from versign, cons being
>>no single layout/implementation  of the data
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@rob one of may reasons
>>  gpmgroup:@ Olof  Why doesn¹t ICANN offer incentives to have open &
>>accurate WHOIS?
>>  gpmgroup:lost sound
>>  Amy Mushahwar:Yes, I've lost audio, too.
>>  Rob Golding (othello):its gone silent :(
>>  Olof Nordling:we have notified the tech services
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@Rob, clearly god reasons you state but
>>whats the alternative ?
>>  Alice Jansen:Apologies - our Staff is looking into the issue. Please
>>refer to the live scribing in the meantime. Thanks for your patience.
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:I mean for a lot of CC tlds its working
>>fine
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:@Benny: No Whois at all?
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:anyway there are a lot of them not working
>>too
>>  gpmgroup:http://stream.icann.org/sjo43-lapaza-64-en.m3u
>>  gpmgroup:external sound
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Benny - personally I think WHOIS is largely
>>pointless and has been for 10 years - in t'old days, when t'interweb was
>>run by people who met down the pub on a friday, it was suseful to knwo
>>who should be contacted about nameserver changes (the tech contact) - now
>>the only person any 3rd party needs realy to contact is the registrar
>>  Rob Golding (othello):is Law-Enforcement have a valid reason to request
>>the "real" data behind a registration, subject to approraite paperwork
>>they can ask
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Rob: You are seeking for contractual realtionships in
>>Whois? Like a thin whois delegation structure?
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:So if for any reason as a hosting company
>>wants to check an owner for a competing domain or infrigements on
>>trademark it shall be hidden ?
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Please send in your questions to the public comment
>>list. Otherwise the comments will likly be overseen.
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Lutz - whois as a way of determining availbility
>>of a domain is flawed - it's not the right method, and as a way for
>>anyone-and-evreyone to ocntact the domain owner - the question really is
>>why shoudl a 3rd party have any "right" to contact anyone - i *choose* if
>>my phone number is published in a directory, and commercial calls (as
>>it's not public) to the number are an *offence* in uk law- why shouldnt
>>whois data be the same - fines for people using it incorrectly - if that
>>was possible people might bemore inclined to give accurate details
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Please add thsi valueable comment to the list. Let it
>>point to proxyy an privacy services
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Lutz - my *personal* opinion is that it's long
>>past its "sell by date" and needs to be taken off the protocol list
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@Rob there is a huge difference in someone
>>registering microosoft.com and and someone who is given a phonenumber...
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:the one registrering a domain is doing
>>somethin active for abuse someone elses rights
>>  Alice Jansen:Participants, please let us know whether you would like us
>>to read your comments in the room. Thanks
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Benny - and there should be methods to determine
>>who that person is - and the _ONLY_ people who would know are teh
>>registrar, as it'll be their client
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Benny - but the number od *domain* infringments
>>is tiny - much more goes on at the _hosting_ level, which whois doesnt
>>help with
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Hosting is easily determined: By looking up the AS
>>Number from the BGP Routing entry
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:So you would like to hand out data for
>>every registrar requesting data?
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Lutz Host != Network :)
>>  gpmgroup:anyone offering commercial services should have to use open
>>and accurate WHOIS
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Benny: The AoC is clear: "easy, accurate and complete
>>access ..."
>>  gpmgroup:Product launcehs and mergers is a poor excuse
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:gpmgroup:  Law Enforcement itself need "privacy" for
>>protecting their people in the witness protection programms
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@gpmgroup spammers harvesting is a very
>>good reason for not giving good data to whois
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:But again: Bring it to the public omment forum.
>>Otherwise the discussion is lost.
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@gpmgroup - and across the EU (and other regions)
>>thats the requirement for valid details on the _website_ - but the
>>_domain_ doenst need to be owned by the organisation using it, and
>>in-and-of-itself doesnt need *public* contact information
>>  gpmgroup:@Benny I know and some companies in the domain industry who
>>should know better are scraping the whois
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@gpmgroup - you have to "scrape" the whois to get
>>the contacts on a transfer !
>>  Rob Golding (othello):olof - my question ... ? are there
>>recommendations on Criminalising misuses of WHOIS data - it took less
>>than 3 days from a new registration before spam started arriving at the
>>unique email address I used on the domain registration - having such
>>information freely available and public is not just a privacy concern but
>>a real issue to normal users who dont need a supplier of dodgy
>>pharmaceuticals
>>  Olof Nordling:@Rob - I'll get to the end of the queue here and deliver
>>that one
>>  JorgeAmodio:good one Milton
>>  gpmgroup:@Rob there's a whole difference between using the WHOIS to
>>facilitate a domain transfer and scraping the WHOIS to send out spam
>>emails to thousands of third party registrants
>>  JorgeAmodio:sure the users will do a Whois before clicking
>>  JorgeAmodio:consumer DONT KNOW what Whois is
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@pmgroup - i know, but you have to get these
>>things in th opene before some fool creates a policy to "ban" scraping of
>>whois data ;)
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Jorge: MOde users does not know how to even ask a
>>whois question (hint: that's the protocol using TCP/43) ... But most does
>>not even know about whois at all
>>  JorgeAmodio:0%
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Jorge - users donteve understand what ssl is -
>>thats why phishing scams are so effectn hen they just have a padock on
>>teh page noin the browser bar !
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:That's why the recommendation to provide an "all whois
>>web interface" by ICANN exists
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:JUst listen to bill
>>  JorgeAmodio:ha wait need to LOL about that
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Jorge: WHy?
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:So why is it so difficult to create a
>>standard on this, with RFCs for anything else and standards for a lot of
>>other things, wy is this so difficult for whois ?
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Benny: Because almost all service uses a different set
>>of options, results and languages
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:I should be rather simple imo
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Most ccTLDs ar enot allowed to provide the data by
>>local law.
>>  Alice Jansen:Kind reminder: Participants, please let us know if you
>>would like your comments to be read in the room. Thanks.
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Then the ODN problem. Can you parse an japanese
>>response?
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Sorry, ALice
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:well its just data... so if you have a
>>standard it shouldnt be a problem
>>  JorgeAmodio:mike please
>>  Alice Jansen:No need to be sorry, Lutz. You are perfectly free to chat
>>with other participants :-). Just wanted to let you know that Olof and I
>>are ready to voice your comments/questions if you wish
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:the problem is the standard which are non
>>existing
>>  JorgeAmodio:nope it is not
>>  JorgeAmodio:no it is not even an imperfect solution
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:let me refrase that.. the problem is the
>>standard which are implemented in so many different ways and shall cover
>>so many different demands from different lawmakers and registries
>>  JorgeAmodio:its conception had nothing to do for what you are trying to
>>use it
>>  JorgeAmodio:useless
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:looking at the statistics for wdrp
>>responses and updates it's less than 2 % who cares to look at the whois
>>data
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:most registrants don't care.. thats the
>>reality here
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:And I am quite sure that most registrars
>>are happy as long as the got paid
>>  JorgeAmodio:the ones who care are law enforcement entities
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:from the registrants
>>  gpmgroup:@ Beeny its easy givem a refund so they do care
>>  JorgeAmodio:and IP attorneys trying to find contact info about who to
>>sue
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:@gpmgroup what kind of refund have you in
>>mind?
>>  gpmgroup:Make it more expensive to use privacy if you don't want
>>privacy to be widely used , give money back to registrants who verify
>>their data
>>  JorgeAmodio:they will pay for privacy that's a fact
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:so lets see selling domains for 9 usd
>>paying 8 usd what to give back ?
>>  JorgeAmodio:centralized ? great concept for a distributed and open
>>Internet
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:centralized "Interface" to access decentalised data
>>  JorgeAmodio:nopet
>>  gpmgroup:I doubt most new gTLDs will retail for $8 or $9  but to answer
>>the question an amount significant enough to encourage the change people
>>want
>>  JorgeAmodio:they want to AGREGATE the data and control access to it
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:the new tld is the least problem... the
>>existing data is the big problem to be solved
>>  gpmgroup:@Jorge .info has a centralized whois and that is much easier
>>to use than the distributed .com model
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:as .xxx explained its costly but they do it
>>  JorgeAmodio:that is part of the distributed nature of the Whois protocol
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:centralized "databases" fail to comply with varying
>>local laws
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Please distinguish between "centralized access" and
>>"storage"
>>  JorgeAmodio:sure, forget who is funding ICANN?
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:Jorge: Everbody ;-)
>>  JorgeAmodio:follow the money
>>  Rob Golding (othello):@Jorge - registrars fund it (over 95%) just for
>>the ability to let anyone-at-all to have a say in how we run our business
>>:p
>>  Alice Jansen:The Review Team is about to wrap up. Please submit your
>>comments/questions to be read now.
>>  Rudi Vansnick:Lutz : not really everybody ... some ccTLDs are just
>>paying a very small amount to ICANN compared to the GTLDs
>>  Benny Samuelsen - Nordreg AB:Taking the night here... have a nice day
>>evening night where ever you are located
>>  Lutz Donnerhacke:/me smiles.
>>  JorgeAmodio:problem is that the weeds keep growing
>>  gpmgroup:Thnak you for asking my question and thanks for a very smooth
>>remote session
>>  Alice Jansen:This session is now closed. Thank you for your
>>participation. Rest assured that the content of this chat box will be
>>emailed to the Review Team Members.
>>  Amy Mushahwar:thank you
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois