RE: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] summary of comments re authoritativeness

["Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx>]

Authoritativeness subgroup members,

A review of the comments received on this topic from stakeholder groups, 
constituencies and others may help advance our work. These are collected in the 
chart prepared by staff, beginning at item 52 (in the most recent version 
circulated  today).

A threshold question is whether it is necessary for this PDP to define which 
Whois data is authoritative in the thick Whois environment. ALAC questions 
whether this is necessary, while NPOC seems to think it is.  (We still have no 
data on the prevalence of data discrepancies between registry and registrar 
Whois in the thick Whois setting, other than the transition report from PIR 
which seems to indicate it is not a problem.)

As to which set of Whois data should be authoritative, only the NCUC clearly 
asserts that registrar data is authoritative.  ALAC notes the registrar data is 
treated as authoritative in the UDRP setting. (Note, though, that since the 
vast majority of UDRP cases involve registrations in thin Whois gTLDs -- .com 
and .net - the question of authoritativeness as between registry and registrar 
may not  arise.)

On the other hand, the registry data is authoritative, according to BC, R'rSG, 
and PIR in their submissions.  Verisign's comments indicate that registry data 
should be authoritative for technical purposes.

Several commentators note that registrars remain responsible for collecting the 
data and for its accuracy (although I note that "responsible" might overstate 
registrars' accuracy obligations under the current RAA). For NCUC this seems to 
dictate a finding that registrar Whois is authoritative, while for the 
registrar and registry commentators, this fact does not appear inconsistent 
with the conclusion that registry Whois is authoritative.

As a platform for discussion, let me pose two questions, informed by these 
responses:

(1)    Does this PDP need to determine authoritativeness?  If no policy 
establishing authoritativeness (other than in the UDRP context) has been 
adopted during all the years that thick Whois systems have been in operation, 
does this indicate that resolving authoritativeness is a "solution in search of 
a problem"?

(2)    If the answer to Q. 1 is "yes," then would the fact that registrars 
remain responsible for collecting the data in question from registrants (and 
for updating the same) disqualify the registry data (all received from 
registrars) from being considered authoritative?  Why or why not? Put another 
way, is there an inherent contradiction if registrars continue to collect all 
data but the registry database were authoritative?


Looking forward to your responses (or to other views of the comments we have 
received).

Steve Metalitz



From: owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Metalitz, 
Steven
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 10:53 AM
To: 'Volker Greimann'; Authoritative Thick WHOIS
Subject: RE: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] RE: Call details / Call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG

I hope 2013 is off to a good start for everyone.

Volker, I think your proposed definition is an excellent start.  Do others have 
comments on it?

Thanks also for your additional comment.  In a thin registry, is all the Whois 
data provided by the registry authoritative (not just the identification of the 
registrar, but also, e.g., the date last updated, creation date and expiration 
date)?  If so, then is the  issue involved in the transition from thin to thick 
 limited to whether the registrant (and admin and technical) contact data as 
displayed by the registry is also considered authoritative?   Looking forward 
to feedback from subgroup members on this, as well as on any of the questions 
posed earlier (see below).

Steve Metalitz

From: 
owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Volker 
Greimann
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 10:49 AM
To: Authoritative Thick WHOIS
Subject: Re: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] RE: Call details / Call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG

Kicking off on the question of authoritativeness:


I did some (little) research into the use of the term authoritative in the 
ICANN context and found this policy document from 2001:

http://www.icann.org/en/about/unique-authoritative-root

>From that, we can extract the following general interpretations:

- "its core design goals is that it reliably provides the same answers to the 
same queries from any source"
- "coordination of the (...) function by a single authority"
- "hierarchical structure" that "allows different parts of the naming database 
to be maintained by different entities"

I also found an unrelated Presentation on What Constitutes an Authoritative 
Source?<http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcsrc.nist.gov%2Fnews_events%2Fprivilege-management-workshop%2Fpresentations%2FRoger_Westman.pdf&ei=k4PUULbmOsfLsgbFkIGIAw&usg=AFQjCNET8ITPGCjxEq8EQ1qcByKkiYjDwA&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.Yms>
 that may be helpful:
http://csrc.nist.gov/news_events/privilege-management-workshop/presentations/Roger_Westman.pdf

Alternatively, we could hold to the lexical meaning of the word:
a : having or proceeding from 
authority<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authority> : 
official<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/official> <authoritative 
church doctrines>
b : clearly accurate or knowledgeable <an authoritative critique>

where I would see option two as the most fitting.

As a strawman, here is one attempt at a definition to start with:

"Authoritative, with respect to provision of whois services, shall be 
interpreted as to signify the single database within a hierarchical database 
structure holding the data that is assumed to be the final authority regarding 
the question which record shall be considered accurate and reliable in case of 
conflicting records; administered by a single adminstrative [agent] and 
consisting of data provided by the registrants of record through their 
registrars."
Finally, I do note that even in thick registries, the registries already 
provide some part of the whois that can be considered authoritative. Any whois 
query for a domain name is first conducted on the registry level, which 
responds with the basic domain data, including the reference which registrar 
provides the actual whois data. This record is authoritative for the data it 
contains for even if multiple registrars may think the domain name is 
registered throughthem, the registries reference of which one actually is is 
authoritative.

Happy holiday,

Volker

Authoritativeness subgroup volunteers,

In preparation for our subgroup call tomorrow (Friday) at 1500 UTC (see below 
for dial-in information), here is the relevant excerpt from our working group 
charter:
Authoritativeness:  what are the implications of a 'thin' Registry possibly 
becoming authoritative for registrant Whois data following the transition from 
a thin-registry model to a thick-registry model. The Working Group should 
consider the term "authoritative" in both the technical (the repository of the 
authoritative data) and policy (who has authority over the data) meanings of 
the word when considering this issue.

"Authoritativeness" is not mentioned in either the preliminary or final issue 
report on thick Whois.  This topic was added by the Drafting Team that 
developed our charter.

Here are a few questions that might kick off our discussions tomorrow:

1.  Are we clear on the "technical" and "policy" definitions of "authoritative" 
as set out in the charter?
2.  Are there other relevant perspectives on "authoritativeness" - for example, 
the perspective(s) of the Whois data user?
3.  What is the "authoritative" Whois data in a thick Whois setting:
(a)  for a gTLD registry that is "born thick"?
(b) after a gTLD registry has migrated from thin to thick (e.g., .org)?
4.  What is the impact of any change in authoritativeness after a gTLD registry 
migrates from thin to thick on:
                (a)  the registry?
                (b)  registrars?
                (c)  domain name registrants?
                (d)  Whois users?
       (e)  Others?

Your suggestions for other questions (or for modifying these) are welcomed!

Finally here is the list of our subgroup volunteers as displayed on our 
subgroup wiki page:

Members

  *   Jill Titzer (RrSG)
  *   Titi Akinsanmi (ALAC)
  *   Amr Elsadr (NCSG)
  *   Tim Ruiz (RrSG)
  *   Jeff Neuman (RySG)
  *   Steve Metalitz (IPC) - lead
  *   Marc Anderson (RySG)
  *   Volker Greimann (RrSG)
  *   Ray Fassett (RySG)


Talk to you tomorrow!

Steve Metalitz



From: 
owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gisella 
Gruber
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:35 AM
To: Authoritative Thick WHOIS
Cc: GNSO Secretariats
Subject: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] Call details / Call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG

Dear All,

The call of Authoritativeness subgroup of Thick Whois WG is scheduled on Friday 
21 December 2012 at 1500 UTC:

0700 PST, 1000 EST, 1500 UTC

Conference ID: 7308

Dial in numbers:
USA:                                                     toll free: 1 800 550 
6865 / toll +1 213 233 3193
For all other numbers:
http://www.adigo.com/icann
If you require a dial-out, please email 
gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx> with your preferred number.

Thank you!
Kind regards,
Gisella

On 17/12/2012 20:13, "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx<mailto:met@xxxxxxx>> wrote:


Thanks Tim.

It looks like Friday, 12/21 at 10 am EST (1500 UTC) works for at least several 
folks so please mark that date/time on your calendar for a call of our subgroup.

I will not be able to attend tomorrow's full working group call but I assume 
that some other subgroup members will and if so I hope they will share with us 
on Friday whatever pearls of wisdom are dispensed then that would help to guide 
us in the subgroup.

Steve Metalitz

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:44 AM
To: Metalitz, Steven; 
'gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:%27gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>'
Subject: RE: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] RE: Doodle poll re call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG

Steve,

Completed the poll with some dates that I "might" be able to make a call, but 
the likelihood is that family/holiday activities will conflict.

Best,
Tim


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] RE: Doodle poll re call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG
From: "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx<mailto:met@xxxxxxx>>
Date: Fri, December 14, 2012 12:27 pm
To: "Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx<mailto:met@xxxxxxx>>,        
"'gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:%27gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>'"
 
<gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>>

We got few responses, perhaps because there ended up being so little lead time 
before the proposed meeting dates/times.

We have now refreshed the Doodle poll with some options later in next week.  
Please visit (or revisit) http://www.doodle.com/xg4gav95k36yazv3 ASAP to 
indicate your availability.  Thanks!

Steve Metalitz

From: 
owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>
 [mailto:owner-gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Metalitz, 
Steven
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:40 AM
To: 
'gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:%27gnso-authoritative-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx>'
Subject: [gnso-authoritative-thickwhois] Doodle poll re call of 
authoritativeness subgroup of thick Whois WG

Subgroup volunteers,

Sorry, it seems to have taken 48 hours to get the mailing list up and running, 
but if you can visit the link at : http://www.doodle.com/xg4gav95k36yazv3 
today, we can try to get a call scheduled tomorrow or Monday.  Thank you!

Steve Metalitz.










--

Bei weiteren Fragen stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung.



Mit freundlichen Grüßen,



Volker A. Greimann

- Rechtsabteilung -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / 
www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Folgen Sie uns bei Twitter oder werden Sie unser Fan bei Facebook:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



Geschäftsführer: Alexander Siffrin

Handelsregister Nr.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

Umsatzsteuer ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



Der Inhalt dieser Nachricht ist vertraulich und nur für den angegebenen 
Empfänger bestimmt. Jede Form der Kenntnisgabe, Veröffentlichung oder 
Weitergabe an Dritte durch den Empfänger ist unzulässig. Sollte diese Nachricht 
nicht für Sie bestimmt sein, so bitten wir Sie, sich mit uns per E-Mail oder 
telefonisch in Verbindung zu setzen.



--------------------------------------------



Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.



Best regards,



Volker A. Greimann

- legal department -



Key-Systems GmbH

Im Oberen Werk 1

66386 St. Ingbert

Tel.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 901

Fax.: +49 (0) 6894 - 9396 851

Email: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Web: www.key-systems.net<http://www.key-systems.net> / 
www.RRPproxy.net<http://www.RRPproxy.net>

www.domaindiscount24.com<http://www.domaindiscount24.com> / 
www.BrandShelter.com<http://www.BrandShelter.com>



Follow us on Twitter or join our fan community on Facebook and stay updated:

www.facebook.com/KeySystems<http://www.facebook.com/KeySystems>

www.twitter.com/key_systems<http://www.twitter.com/key_systems>



CEO: Alexander Siffrin

Registration No.: HR B 18835 - Saarbruecken

V.A.T. ID.: DE211006534



Member of the KEYDRIVE GROUP

www.keydrive.lu<http://www.keydrive.lu>



This e-mail and its attachments is intended only for the person to whom it is 
addressed. Furthermore it is not permitted to publish any content of this 
email. You must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. If an 
addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, kindly notify the 
author by replying to this e-mail or contacting us by telephone.