[gnso-rap-dt] WHOIS scope query

["Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear group:

 

Below please find a draft to the GNSO Council, asking for advice regarding
how WHOIS fits within the scope and charter of our WG.

 

All comments are welcome.  Please post them to the list this week.  Please
comment on items a) and b); I want to make sure they accurately reflect our
recent discussions.  We will reconfirm level of support and finalize the
letter in our 20 July meeting.

 

With best wishes,

--Greg

 

* * * * * * 

 

Dear Avri, Chuck, and Mike:

 

I am writing to you on behalf of the Registration Abuse Policies Working
Group (RAPWG).  We kindly request the Council's guidance and clarification
regarding a charter issue.

 

As you know, the RAPWG charter contains the broad mandate to "identify which
aspects of the subject of registration abuse are within ICANN's mission to
address and which are within the set of topics on which ICANN may establish
policies that are binding on gTLD registry operators and ICANN-accredited
registrars," and to "gather facts, define terms, provide the appropriate
focus and definition of the policy issue(s), if any, to be addressed."

 

During the RAPWG's work, the issue of WHOIS has been raised.  WHOIS is a
topic within GNSO policy-making scope, and an area around which there are
abuse and compliance issues.  And WHOIS issues are certainly a factor in
other abuse areas -- for example, criminals who register domain names
provide inaccurate contact information. 

 

On the other hand, we are also aware of the very long history of WHOIS
discussions in the GNSO, and WHOIS efforts the GNSO currently has underway.
(See: http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/ ).  It is our understanding that
the 2005-2007 GNSO WHOIS Task Force did not arrive at supermajority support
for any of the proposals it considered.  After that, the GNSO Council
concluded in October 2007 that a "comprehensive, objective, and quantifiable
understanding of key factual issues regarding the gTLD WHOIS system would
benefit future GNSO policy development efforts", received comment from the
public and the GAC, and created the WHOIS Hypotheses WG.  That group
delivered its report in August 2008
(http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-study-hypothesis-group-report-to-c
ouncil-26aug08.pdf), proposing a number of core questions regarding WHOIS
misuse, contractual compliance, privacy services, and WHOIS accuracy.  The
Policy staff is now engaged in developing the costs and feasibility of
conducting six of those studies.  To summarize, it seems that previous
group(s) failed to reach consensus on WHOIS issues, the Council concluded
that objective and quantifiable data must be developed in order to have
WHOIS policy discussions, the Council convened a group to frame the needed
areas of study, and work now is underway regarding the WHOIS questions the
Council chose.  Is this correct?

 

The RAPWG membership has preferences, around which we have rough consensus: 

a) because of the past and present GNSO efforts, leave WHOIS off our list of
registration abuses for major examination, research, and
recommendation-making. And, 

b) include examples and background in its report when WHOIS issues are a
factor in other abuse issues. 

However, some members feel that WHOIS should be a central topic of
discussion in the RAPWG, that we do research on the topic, and potentially
make recommendations.

 

Our questions to the Council therefore are:  May WHOIS be excluded in whole
or in part from the RAPWG's charter?  How can the Charter be modified to
ensure that the RAPWG avoids duplicating previous and current GNSO efforts?
For example, should we avoid the areas already examined by the WHOIS
Hypotheses WG?

 

A practical effect of undertaking examination of WHOIS issues is that it
will extend the RAPWG's life by an unknown amount of time.  Please note that
the RAPWG is examining a long list of other topics, including
cybersquatting, front-running, and cybercrime-related issues.  A full list
is in the latest "RAPWG Abuse Categories and Types" document at:
https://st.icann.org/reg-abuse-wg/index.cgi?registration_abuse_policies_work
ing_group

 

Thank you for your advice, and we look forward to hearing from you.

 

Respectfully submitted,

--Greg Aaron

Chair, RAPWG