[Rt4-whois] REMINDER - Call with ICANN Board today @ 19:00 UTC
Kathy Kleiman
kathy at kathykleiman.com
Wed Feb 29 20:33:43 UTC 2012
Hi All,
There are some very interesting discussion items in the chat room text
below -- and it shares a sense of what's on the minds of the Board. I
expect we'll see a continuation of the types of issues raised below in
our meeting with the Board in Costa Rica. So if you missed the call,
thanks for taking a quick read through...
Best,
Kathy:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find the chat transcript from the call below, and also the
> final slide deck attached as presented (featuring a very minor
> correction in relation to the version sent earlier).
>
> Very best regards
>
> Olof
>
> ------------------
>
> CHAT TRANSCRIPT
>
> Olof Nordling: (2/29/2012 18:39) Welcome to the WHOIS RT - ICANN Board
> Webinar!
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (19:56) Hi All!
>
> Ram Mohan: (19:58) hi
>
> Emily Taylor: (19:59) Hi
>
> Diane: (19:59) hello
>
> Omar Kaminski: (19:59) hi
>
> judith: (20:01) Hello
>
> cherine chalaby: (20:01) hi
>
> Akram Atallah: (20:01) hello everyone!
>
> Mike Silber: (20:01) Thanks Olaf - hi all
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:08) Minor comment: Whois is tied to domain names,
> not web sites.
>
> Thomas Narten: (20:10) does the 20% figure include proxy
> registrations? I.e., are those considered "inaccurate"?
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:12) There is a separate study in play, right now,
> as Emily notes.
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:12) not sure i understand the policy gap bullet - are
> you stating that the proxy service is not congruent with offering
> privacy? Or whether there is doubt about accuracy?
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:13) Thomas, if you could reach the proxy service
> (or privacy service) with accurate information in the Whois, that was
> "reachable"
>
> Susan: (20:13) and there is no clear definition of Privacy versus
> Proxy registrations
>
> Susan: (20:13) very confused at the moment
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:15) Privacy - registrant's name + privacy service
> contact information; proxy service - all information, including
> registrant is listed as the proxy service provider.
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:15) in the .INFO TLD, over 60% of abusive names are
> proxied; a few registrars cooperate after the registry identifies a
> potential problem, but in most cases the registry can't really draw
> many patterns from proxy registrations
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:15) so i don't understand what is meant by need to
> raise awareness and improve user-friendliness...
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:17) legitimate uses of proxy services shared with
> us by both commercial and noncommercial user groups.
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:18) thanks Emily!
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:26) Ram, one of the larger issues we (Review
> Team) would like to encourage is a "culture of compliance."
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:27) Kathy - got it. But there is "compliance" and
> there is Compliance...
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:27) Good point :-)!
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:34) And also Data Protection Commissioners who
> have tried to participate over the years, but find it hard to follow
> over long periods of time. Outreach on new policy issues.
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:34) Reduce by 50% from what level?
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:36) 23% wholly inaccurate. 21% inaccurate to the
> point of inability to reach the registrant.
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:36) Sorry: 23% wholly accurate...
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:37) "Contactibility"
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:37) Where does the 50% goal come from? Why not a
> larger or smaller number? How feasible is this goal?
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:38) in practice, quite a few "non-contactable"
> registrants are from large companies, where employees have left but
> the records have not been updated. I worry about measures such as
> removing the domain altogether if the registrant is unreachable.
> Perhaps a WHOIS Data Redemption Period has to be created, where the
> name goes dark but can be restored upon more accurate data?
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:39) who is speaking, please?
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:39) Is there a target level that would be
> considered sufficient? E.g. 80% contactible? 90%? 95%? 99%? 99.9%?
>
> Susan: (20:40) I agree with you Ram but in the obvious cases which I
> run into frequently where the only information is and "a" in each field
>
> Susan: (20:40) I think action should be taken swiftly
>
> judith: (20:40) Billing & collection records are from my experience
> always accurate. Money talks.
>
> Susan: (20:41) I agree with you Judith but that data is not always
> included in the WHOIS
>
> Steve Crocker: (20:41) Judith, you're right!
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:41) Susan - ugh! Better penalties, with a decent
> remedy could work then. That's what I mean by the WHOIS Data
> Redemption Period - the name goes down, if the name is not contactable
>
> Susan: (20:41) If the billing data that is verified was included in
> the WHOIS record then we would have more accuracy
>
> judith: (20:42) Yes Susan. WHOis data is almost always filled up by
> an individual in an IT Dept where there is frequent employee churn.
>
> Susan: (20:42) not in a well managed domain name portfolio!
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:42) Susan - that won't work in the case of proxy data...
>
> judith: (20:42) I am referring to the Registrant.
>
> Susan: (20:43) my view point (not necessarily ) as a team member but
> as Facebook employee content should never be served on a proxy
> registration
>
> Susan: (20:44) that is what Privacy registrations are for
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:44) is a rubbish record = a rubbish domain?
>
> Bill Graham: (20:44) Going forward, could there not be a requirement
> that whois data be accurate for a new registrant (some TLDs do that
> now). Won't help with cleanup, but if done before the new gTLDs come
> along, it would be a step forward
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:44) if we got rid of a rubbish record, what happens
> to the domain linked to the record?
>
> Susan: (20:45) Bill I would agree, the new gTlds should be required
> to verify for accuracy
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:46) Quick note that there may be a difference
> between knowing who the Registrant is, and reaching the Registrant to
> let me know about a legal concern (e.g., a cease and desist letter)
>
> Thomas Narten: (20:46) my point is that the only domain names that
> people care about looking up in whois is ones where someone believes
> some sort of abuse is going on. Is that a fair statement?
>
> Susan: (20:46) Not completely
>
> Emily Taylor: (20:47) Thomas - not entirely. It's an important
> aspect, but not the only one.
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:47) Bill - accuracy is itself not fully defined
>
> Mike Silber: (20:47) just to try get a benchmark - given the comment
> about GoDaddy going beyond simple compliance - what are their figures
> like?
>
> Susan: (20:47) in acquisitions or domain name management I use the
> WHOIS records of our domain names on a daily basis
>
> Bladel: (20:48) @MIke: Do you mean internal GoDaddy stats?
>
> Bladel: (20:49) The NORC accuracy study was not, to my knowledge,
> broken down by registrar (altho this would be very interesting!).
>
> Mike Silber: (20:51) if they are willing to share - even if rough or
> under confidentiality
>
> judith: (20:51) Problem being- domain names have become so
> inexpensive- aking to a disposable consumer item. Does Wal-Mart track
> who bought a $35 T-shirt?
>
> Mike Silber: (20:52) would like to know where a registrar "who
> cares" sits, so we know better what the worst case of those who do not
> care are sitting with
>
> Bladel: (20:53) @Judith: Considering this has made Internet / DNS
> participation open to millions of new global users, we do not see
> inexpensive fees as a "problem."
>
> Susan: (20:53) Judith I have always felt that domain name
> registrations fees do not cover the full expense of registering and
> administering a domain name
>
> Susan: (20:54) If the registrars charged more and used the funds to
> verify data it would shrink the problems we have
>
> Susan: (20:54) companies are picking up the expenses due to the lack
> of accuracy
>
> Diane: (20:54) Do I have a set of the slides available to send to
> the board members who arent attending?
>
> judith: (20:54) I agree with you, Susan.
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:54) @Bladel: GoDaddy offers a *lot* for a low cost
> registration, and seem to be a success, so not sure more $$ will
> result in better accuracy
>
> judith: (20:55) GoDaddy sells services.
>
> Olof Nordling: (20:56) Yes, sent with the reminder this morning (my
> morning) but I'll send you one slightly improved in a jiffy
>
> Ram Mohan: (20:56) @Judith - i am not sure data shows that low
> prices leads to lower accuracy, or vice versa
>
> Thomas Narten: (20:56) people aren't paying for domain names with
> "cash".
>
> judith: (20:57) From personal experience- I never bother to update
> my corporate whois data!
>
> Diane: (20:57) Thanks Olof - will distribute to the board after the call
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (20:58) On this point, we talked with ICANN Staff,
> and they mentioned that an expansion of Internic might be possible.
>
> Lynn Goodendorf: (20:58) unfortunately, there are domain names paid
> for with stolen credit card data; this was presented by Law Enforcement
>
> Steve Crocker: (21:03) Thanks Emily and everyone. I need to break
> off to head to the airport.
>
> Seth Reiss 2: (21:04) Thanks Emily and Board
>
> Ram Mohan: (21:04) Thanks Emily & Whois team for a good overview,
> and look forward to a good session in Costa Rica
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (21:04) Tx Steve!
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (21:05) Any questions?
>
> Michael Yakushev: (21:05) thanks to all
>
> judith: (21:05) Thank you!
>
> Olof Nordling: (21:05) Thanks all!
>
> Kathy Kleiman: (21:05) Tx All!
>
> *From:*Olof Nordling
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 29, 2012 6:37 PM
> *To:* Olof Nordling; Diane Schroeder; Alina Syunkova; Denise Michel;
> 'Emily Taylor'; 'Kathy Kleiman'; 'Nettlefold, Peter'; 'Mikhail
> Yakushev'; 'Smith, Bill'; Alice Jansen; 'Lynn Goodendorf'; 'Lynn2
> Goodendorf'; 'LEMON, Sharon'; 'Sharon Lemon'; 'Omar Kaminski'; 'Sarmad
> Hussain'; 'Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet'; 'Susan Kawaguchi'; 'James
> Bladel'; 'Lutz Donnerhacke'; 'Seth M Reiss'
> *Subject:* RE: REMINDER -- Call with ICANN Board today @ 19:00 UTC
>
> Dear Review Team Members,
>
> With around 90 minutes left until the call begins, I would just like
> to remind you again to please *identify yourselves at the call before
> you speak*. This will facilitate for all -- not the least for the
> scribes (who may be used to the voices of the Board members, but less
> so when it comes to Review Team members...)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Olof
>
> *From:*Olof Nordling
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:37 AM
> *To:* Diane Schroeder; Alina Syunkova; Olof Nordling; Denise Michel;
> 'Emily Taylor'; 'Kathy Kleiman'; 'Nettlefold, Peter'; 'Mikhail
> Yakushev'; 'Smith, Bill'; 'Lynn Goodendorf'; 'Lynn2 Goodendorf';
> 'LEMON, Sharon'; 'Sharon Lemon'; 'Omar Kaminski'; 'Sarmad Hussain';
> 'Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet'; 'Susan Kawaguchi'; 'James Bladel';
> 'Lutz Donnerhacke'; 'Seth M Reiss'
> *Subject:* REMINDER -- Call with ICANN Board today @ 19:00 UTC
>
> Dear Review Team Members,
>
> Your conference call with the ICANN Board of Directors is scheduled for:
>
> ***Wednesday, 29 February 2012***
>
> *19:00 UTC*
>
> *Please be kindly reminded to identify yourself before you speak.*
>
> /Please check your local time at/:
>
> *http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT-ICANN+BOARD+OF+DIRECTORS&iso=20120229T19
> <http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=WHOIS+RT-ICANN+BOARD+OF+DIRECTORS&iso=20120229T19>*
>
> PASSWORD: *27318 **followed by **# *
>
> *_Adobe room_**: **http://icann.adobeconnect.com/whois-review/*
>
> *_Dial-in numbers:_*
>
> Please find below a table which encapsulates dial-in numbers for your
> countries of residence.
>
> Should you be traveling, please refer to the full list which is
> available at: *http://www.adigo.com/icann/*
>
> *Australia*
>
>
>
> 1 800 009 820
>
> 1 800 036 775
>
> Sydney T +61 290372962
>
> Melbourne T +61 399996500
>
> Brisbane T +61 731777546
>
> *Austria*
>
>
>
> L - 0 800 295 858
>
> M - 0 800 295 138
>
> T - +43 720 882 638
>
> *Belgium*
>
>
>
> L - 0800 79210
>
> M -- 0800 79218
>
> T - +32 78 480 286
>
> *Brazil*
>
>
>
> L - 0800 891 1597
>
> M - 0800 891 1598
>
> T - +55 613 717 2040
>
> *Canada*
>
>
>
> 1 800 550 6865
>
> T - +1 213 233 3193
>
> *France*
>
>
>
> 0800 90 25 56
>
> T - +33 170618347
>
> *Germany*
>
>
>
> L - 0800 1016 120
>
> G - M 0800 1016 124
>
> *Russia*
>
>
>
> 8 10 8002 535 3011
> T - +7 499 650 7835
>
> *United Kingdom*
>
>
>
> 0800 032 6646
>
> T - +44 207 099 0867
>
> *United States*
>
>
>
> 1 800 550 6865
>
> T - +1 213 233 3193
>
> /T -- local toll number ; M -- mobile preferred number ; L -- landline
> preferred number/
>
> Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require a dial-out for
> this call.
>
> Please also find attached the slides that will be presented at the call.
>
> Very best regards
>
> Olof
>
--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rt4-whois/attachments/20120229/cf6319ef/attachment.html
More information about the Rt4-whois
mailing list