[Rt4-whois] Centralized Whois Query system run by ICANN - Scope and concerns

Wed Nov 30 16:27:20 UTC 2011

I agree that we should not try and answer all the questions but I was under the impression that the centralized WHOIS was only targeting .com and .net to solve the problem of having to search for the correct registrar out of the almost 1000 possible.

I do not agree to include all gtlds.

From: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org [mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of James M. Bladel
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:21 AM
To: Emily Taylor
Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Centralized Whois Query system run by ICANN - Scope and concerns

No, I don't think we should attempt to answer these questions in RT4, nor presume that we have even identified all of the dependent questions.

I believe our recommendation should task the Board, within a reasonable timeframe (90 days?), to request an issues report on a Centralized WHOIS system for all gTLDs, including how it should be operated and what measures would be adopted to protect against abuse / privacy violations / data harvesting.

(This will initiate a PDP which, while slower, will be a more comprehensive approach)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Centralized Whois Query system run by ICANN -
Scope and concerns
From: Emily Taylor <emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>>
Date: Wed, November 30, 2011 10:15 am
To: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel at godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>>
Cc: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>>, rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>

Hi James

Thanks for raising these points.  Can you suggest some language which you think would work?  Also, Kathy raised a good point about whether this is limited to thin registries (.com, .net) or all?  I don't think we've ever discussed this.

Kind regards

Emily
On 30 November 2011 16:06, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com<mailto:jbladel at godaddy.com>> wrote:
I don't oppose this recommendation, but my issue with this is that we are once again being too vague in what we're asking.

ICANN:    Who?  Staff?  The Board? The GNSO?  Contracted 3rd party?

Set up:  How?  By launching a PDP?  Sending out an RFP?

Deadline?

Are we confident that this group has considered all of the consequences to privacy, security, access, SLAs, etc.?  (Reasons why a PDP can be more helpful for things like this...)

Thanks--

J.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Centralized Whois Query system run by ICANN -
Scope and concerns
From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>>
Date: Wed, November 30, 2011 9:56 am
To: rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>

All,
Is this the current version of the Lutz proposal now in circulation? I
thought it applied only to a centralized database of the current "thin
registries," namely .COM and .NET. If so, I can see the advantages and
support sending it out as a recommendation in the draft report.

But if this is a single database of all registries, thick and thin, now
and in the future, I think we creating a database problem. It's an
enormous amount of data and creates a focal point for abuse, for
warehousing, etc. It's the type of policing job that ICANN has never had
to do, and is not operationally set up to do.

So thought summary: If ICANN is helping remedy a bad situation by
operating a single registry for .COM and .NET to fix a historical
problem, I think I am OK for now (pending review of the draft with
registries -- after publication is fine). One database of all Whois
information to Rule the World, not so good.

RECOMMENDATION EDIT:

Detailed recommendation:
ICANN should set up a dedicated, multilingual website to allow
"unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS
information" **FOR .COM AND .NET, THE EXISTING "THIN REGISTRIES"** even for those people which have problems with the plain
WHOIS protocol.

The WHOIS information should be collected by following the thin WHOIS
approach starting at whois.iana.org<http://whois.iana.org>. The service should display the
contractural relationships which are revealed by the WHOIS referals in
a clear and understandable way. The results should be mark clearly the
relevant information "including registrant, technical, ** DELETE BILLING** billing, and
administrative contact" data.

** NOTE: Billing data, which includes credit cards Folks, is simply not
displayed in any other Whois search results. It is only registrant,
technical, and admin contact.**

Best,
Kathy

> Proposal:
>
> Summary:
> ICANN should set up and maintain a web interface to access
> all the WHOIS services in order to ease access to the WHOIS data.
>
> Presumption:
> The AoC requires that "ICANN implement measures to maintain timely,
> unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS information,
> including registrant, technical, billing, and administrative contact
> information."
>
> Observation:
> An User Insight Report came up with the following results:
> + Almost nobody is aware of whois
> + Almost nobody is able to query a whois server correctly
> + Whois queries were done on websites which occur first in the search
> engine results. Usually those pages are overloaded with advertisments.
>
> Detailed recommendation:
> ICANN should set up a dedicated, multilingual website to allow
> "unrestricted and public access to accurate and complete WHOIS
> information" even for those people which have problems with the plain
> WHOIS protocol.
>
> The WHOIS information should be collected by following the thin WHOIS
> approach starting at whois.iana.org<http://whois.iana.org>. The service should display the
> contractural relationships which are revealed by the WHOIS referals in
> a clear and understandable way. The results should be mark clearly the
> relevant information "including registrant, technical, billing, and
> administrative contact" data.
>
> The server needs to be run by ICANN itself, because the "timely,
> unrestricted and public access" is usually rate limited, stripped or even
> blocked by the various WHOIS server administrators for uncontractual
> third party access. ICANN itself is the only party having the power to
> overcome those limits using its contratual compliance.
> _______________________________________________
> Rt4-whois mailing list
> Rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:Rt4-whois at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

--

_______________________________________________
Rt4-whois mailing list
Rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:Rt4-whois at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

_______________________________________________
Rt4-whois mailing list
Rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:Rt4-whois at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

--

   [http://www.etlaw.co.uk/images/stories/etlaw/etclogo250x60.gif]

76 Temple Road, Oxford OX4 2EZ UK
t: +44 (0)1865 582 811 • m: +44 (0)7540 049 322
emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>

www.etlaw.co.uk<http://www.etlaw.co.uk>

Emily Taylor Consultancy Limited is a company registered in England and Wales No. 730471. VAT No. 114487713.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20111130/7307d623/attachment.html 