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

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

ah!  good catch.

yep, i agree.  maybe we could acknowledge/support some of the recommendations 
in that report.  i'm especially taken with the theme of standardized queries 
and results.  

mikey


On Apr 5, 2010, at 4:36 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:

> 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 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> <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
> http://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://mneylon.tel
> 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  
> Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
> 
> 
> 

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)