[Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Fri Dec 2 18:20:25 UTC 2011

+1

Thick vs thin as about where the data is stored (and who controls it) not where it is accessed/displayed.

Lutz's proposal addresses a significant issue that was highlighted during our consumer research. While that occurred towards the end of our work, the issue isn't new, we heard from several on the team that following WHOIS breadcrumbs is difficult. Lutz's proposal came out, as I recall, as a result of our discussions in Dakar (and followup discussions). Dismissing it because it is "too late" is in my opinion unwarranted. (We could make the same argument for the proxy and privacy Voluntary Code, but we shouldn't.)

In addition, as I think I've stated before, *anyone* that has a desire to offer the service Lutz is proposing can do so. That fact is an inherent part of the Internet, unless we're going to switch to a model of ask for permission as would be the case at the ITU, but I digress.

I'll have to read the lengthy discourse on why this is a bad idea later.

On Dec 2, 2011, at 9:10 AM, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>> wrote:

Perhaps it is because we have had an intense week trying to wrap this up.
But I thought Lutz had submitted this recommendation some time ago.  And on the last conference call, he clarified that
this was not a centralized database but rather a centralized interface.  And his recommendation referenced the consumer research study which
I also called out and acknowledged the linkage.  So it is also a surprise to me that we are not all in ageement.

>From my perspective, this is not about Thick or Thin Whois data.   It is about alleviatng the difficulties that absolutely everyone encounters in doing
Whois lookups.  For those of us involved in the domain name industry, we are more familiar with navigating.  But I have to say it is cumbersome and
usually requires several steps to find the registrant information.
Lynn

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy at kathykleiman.com<mailto:kathy at kathykleiman.com>>
Date: Fri, December 02, 2011 11:39 am
To: rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>

Completely disagree guys, and am writing an extensive message. I have to say that two days after we were due to report out, I am surprised/concerned/upset to be debating substantive policy matters.

But the fact is that the idea of  Thick WHOIS database for existing thin registries (and all, there are Four of them, have we ever discussed that fact?) is **already being debated**.  They recognize that there may be intended and possibly considerable unintended consequences of the process.  Am reviewing their work and will share shortly.

Suffice to say, I think we have leapt headlong into policy... Kathy

<< Yes - there is not a difference in privacy by implementing a centralized interface to all the existing Whois pages.  All the interface does is provide a single point of access to the same data versus multiple points of access (that would still be functional).
Lynn

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
From: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith at paypal-inc.com<mailto:bill.smith at paypal-inc.com>>
Date: Fri, December 02, 2011 10:02 am
To: "lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>" <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>>
Cc: Emily Taylor <emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>>, "rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org>"
<rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org>>, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz at iks-jena.de<mailto:lutz at iks-jena.de>>,
"rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>" <rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>>

I agree with Lynn and Peter on this. I'm having difficulty understanding the privacy implications of better usability, other than more people would use the service but then that's the purpose of improved usability.

On Dec 2, 2011, at 4:39 AM, <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>> <lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com<mailto:lynn at goodsecurityconsulting.com>> wrote:

> I would like to get a better understanding of the. Objection or concern about Lutz's recommendation. If an interface is only implemented for .net and .com, it defeats the purpose and does not provide ease of access to all WHOIS registration data.
> Lynn
>
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emily Taylor <emily at emilytaylor.eu<mailto:emily at emilytaylor.eu>>
> Sender: rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois-bounces at icann.org>
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 08:28:15
> To: Lutz Donnerhacke<lutz at iks-jena.de<mailto:lutz at iks-jena.de>>
> Cc: rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org><rt4-whois at icann.org<mailto:rt4-whois at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations
> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>
> Thank you for these constructive ideas. Apologies for my mistake on this one. I would like Kathy's view on the proposed wording before any sign offing this as I am aware it is something on which she has previously raised comments.
>
> Peter I think you meant thin registries didn't you? That would be a more accurate and precise version of what we agreed. This another one where (I think) we are all agreed on a minimum which in my view would represent a real step forward. What there is not consensus on is how far or whether such a look-up could or should be expanded. If is not already clear in the text we should find a way of expressing clearly that our proposal should not necessitate any transfer of databases, escrow or similar. It is simply a single look up point.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2 Dec 2011, at 07:35, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz at iks-jena.de<mailto:lutz at iks-jena.de>> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 03:05:13PM +1100, Nettlefold, Peter wrote:
>>> "To make WHOIS data more accessible for consumers, the review team
>>> recommends that ICANN should set up a dedicated, multilingual interface
>>> website to help users access thick gTLD WHOIS data.
>>
>> Remove 'thick gTLD'. The scope is narrowed later.
>>
>>> This would be a smart web portal, that would assist users to access
>>> publicly available WHOIS data. It is not envisaged that this would
>>> replicate registry databases in any way, but instead help users by
>>> providing a single centralised site through which to search those
>>> databases, and to display the WHOIS data in an accessible way.
>>
>> Ack. (There is no reference zu gTLD.)
>>
>>> The review team has discussed the scope of this portal, and seeks
>>> ecommunity views on whether it should only apply to thin gTLD registries,
>>> or should instead provide a comprehensive gTLD search service."
>>
>> In order to be really useful, the system should be able to access any ICANN
>> regulated WHOIS data (which includes ASN and IP).
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

_______________________________________________
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