RE: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Line 409, PDF page 18 and footnote 5

["Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

As currently stated, the footnote at 409 is factually incorrect.  WHOIS is
NOT a manual protocol.  Port 43 WHOIS protocol is fully automated.
Registrars and other parties make millions upon millions of automated
queries to port 43 WHOIS servers every day.

Some port 43 servers are rate-limited (via IP, etc.) to prevent WHOIS mining
by spammers, etc. 

Joe's interested in a system that would make certain data available in a
higher-volume fashion than is available via rate-limited WHOIS.

All best,
--Greg



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joe St Sauver
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 3:00 PM
To: gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Line 409, PDF page 18 and footnote 5


Line 408-411 mentions:

   o Make additional non-private information about registered domains 
   available through DNS-based (not WHOIS[fn5]) queries (e.g., by 
   defining new uses for TXT resource records), perhaps including the 
   age of the domain, the number of name server changes made during a 
   recent defined time interval, and the like

I would also propose adding after line 411 text clarifying that:

   "The DNS-based zone envisioned under this section need not be offered 
   by ICANN itself, nor the registries or registrars. Rather, private
   entities, given bulk access to the required data, might offer that 
   data via DNS or another mechanism in the public interest. ICANN, the 
   registries and the registrars need only provide bulk access to the 
   required data already available through whois (albeit 
   currently available only at ad hoc low query volume levels)."

Footnote 5 states:

   5. A DNS-based system could be queried through automation rather than
   manually. Whois is a manual protocol and is not suitable for real time
   queries.

I propose replacing the last sentence of footnote 5 with: "Whois is
a protocol which, as routinely deployed, generally forbids automated 
queries, and hence is only suitable for ad hoc manual query volumes. 
DNS has demonstrated the ability to scale to extremely large automated
query volumes in support of things like DNS block lists, and should 
not be require the same sort of a priori query traffic volume limits, 
although limits to control demonstrable abuse may still be needed from
time to time.

Regards,

Joe

Disclaimer: all opinions strictly my own