ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RDAP/Thick WHOIS Public Comment

  • To: <comments-rdds-output-03dec15@xxxxxxxxx>, <comments-rdap-profile-03dec15@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RDAP/Thick WHOIS Public Comment
  • From: "Graeme Bunton" <gbunton@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:03:11 -0400

Tucows supports the alternative framework proposed by Google Inc. in its
comments on Thick Whois/RDAP Implementation. 


We agree that the consistent display requirements in the Thick Whois Policy
could be better implemented as follows: 

-          Having registries include the Registrar Abuse Contact Email and
Phone Number in their Whois Outputs;

-          Keeping the Reseller Field Optional for both registries and
registrars; and

-          Having Registries continue to display only one expiration date
(the registry expiration date).


Considering that this proposed alternative would condense the timeline for
the remaining thin registries to transition to thick and show fields that
are currently only required in the registrar output within the registry
output, registrars should not be required to implement RDAP. Pending policy
development work that is applicable to RDAP, registries (and registrars that
optionally implement RDAP) should be free to develop their own operational
practices for RDAP and be encouraged to share their findings and experiences
to inform future policy development work. 




Graeme Bunton ,




Graeme Bunton

Manager, Management Information Systems

Manager, Public Policy

Tucows Inc.

PH: 416 535 0123 ext 1634


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy