ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

[gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Fwd: [WHOIS-WG] Initial WHOIS Service Requirements Report for Council review and discussion

  • To: IRTP B Mailing List <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Fwd: [WHOIS-WG] Initial WHOIS Service Requirements Report for Council review and discussion
  • From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 21:36:28 +0000

This may have implications on IRTP etc.,

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 5 April 2010 18:08:24 GMT+01:00
> To: <whois-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [WHOIS-WG] Initial WHOIS Service Requirements Report for Council 
> review and discussion
> Dear colleagues,
> I am forwarding this document sent to SSAC last week. I guess we will have it 
> receive for comments through other, more official, ways. Anyway, as always 
> the clock is running fast, and even more in the At-Large context. So I 
> thought an early notice would allow us to send a meaningful reply with 
> reasonable deadlines.  In this case, comments are by close of business day on 
> Monday, May 17.
> Yet another WHOIS document from ICANN, you may say. This one is specially 
> interesting in that it intends to set the requirements for a new WHOIS 
> system. Would you believe it, it also contains words like "privacy" and 
> "access control" .  
> My personal comments are below, but I suggest you read the document before 
> the comments . 
> I will add that this document is really about defining the WHOIS *service* . 
> It should be obvious that the current WHOIS protocol (RFC3912) is unable to 
> deliver what is required in the appended document.   Hencer my question below 
> to Steve Crocker if ICANN intends to go down the IETF standards process or do 
> its own thing (which would be bad IMHO) . 
> I am willing to hold the pen to summarize the comments.
> Patrick 

Attachment: Whois Service Requirements Initial Report to GNSO 26 Mar2010.pdf
Description: Whois Service Requirements Initial Report to GNSO 26 Mar2010.pdf

>> From: Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: 1 Apr 2010 08:17:52 GMT+02:00
>> To: Steve Crocker <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: ICANN SSAC <ssac@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: [ssac] Fwd: Initial WHOIS Service Requirements Report for 
>> Council review and discussion
>> Reply-To: patrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hello Steve,
>> I am starting a similar exercise on the ALAC side. By joining the SSAC 
>> group, I hope to be able pass on information between both ACs and sort of 
>> cross-pollinize.
>> I note that the requirements mention several recommendations the SSAC has 
>> done in the past regarding authentication and granual access to information, 
>> which has been a major request of the ALAC over the years.  It is also a 
>> technical necessity for some registrars and registries that need to comply 
>> with local privacy laws. For example, Telnic had quite some problems 
>> implementing a WHOIS service that would comply with the UK laws on privacy.
>> It is not clear if the intention is to update the WHOIS protocol to match 
>> the new requirements, in which case it should go through the IETF standards 
>> process or if ICANN intends to develop its own WHOIS protocol-like service. 
>> In any case, because the WHOIS protocol is being used outside the gTLD space 
>> by ccTLDs and RIRs, we need to avoid having different dialects of WHOIS, 
>> which would share a similar name, but different interfaces and output. I 
>> find it strange also that the ASO is not associated to this consultation, 
>> given that the WHOIS service is a central part of the work of RIRs.
>> The use of a structured data model would allow for easier localization of 
>> the client software. This would be most welcome by those who do not have 
>> English as one of their languages and do not understand what "tech-c" may 
>> mean.
>> The use of a machine-parseable output would certainly be beneficial for 
>> legitimate uses of the WHOIS information, allowing to automate processes. On 
>> the other hand, it will also make the life of those with malicious intents 
>> much easier, too. There should be mechanisms put in place to prevent large 
>> scale harvesting of data for malicious use.
>> Patrick
> -- 
> Patrick Vande Walle
> Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu
> Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu
> Facebook: http://facebook.vande-walle.eu
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.vande-walle.eu
> _______________________________________________
> WHOIS-WG mailing list
> WHOIS-WG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-wg_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> WHOIS WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/gnso-liaison/index.cgi?whois_policy

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business  
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy