FW: [gnso-res-sga] gnso-whois-wga

["Peter Stevenson- Fabulous.com" <peter.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Eric,

 

I have confused you and I do apologize for that as I was not clear in the
point I was trying to make.

 

I agree that it would be extremely hard to implement and manage, but if
accreditation/verification was to be implemented I wanted to make the point
that there is substantial work required for all Registrar's to do.

 

Hope this gives clarification.

 

Again sorry for any confusion.

 

Regards,

 

Peter Stevenson

Fabulous.com <http://www.fabulous.com/> 

peter.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

The information contained in this email is confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the
information in this email in any way.
Dark Blue Sea does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached
files.
The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the
views or opinions of Dark Blue Sea.
Dark Blue Sea does not warrant that any attachments are free from viruses or
other defects.
You assume all liability for any loss, damage or other consequences which
may arise from opening or using the attachments

 

  _____  

From: Hugh Dierker [mailto:hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 1:38 PM
To: Peter Stevenson- Fabulous.com
Subject: Re: [gnso-res-sga] gnso-whois-wga

 

Sir you have an inconsistency here. You agree with Ross - no accreditation.
yet in the very next line you agree to accreditation.  (i will asterick them
below) Please explain.

 

Oh, and welcome to the fray.

 

Eric

"Peter Stevenson- Fabulous.com" <peter.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

 

I have recently come on as an observer and I am trying to get up to speed
with all that has been happening in this work group.

 

Below is just comments on certain issues that have been raised at different
times and I do apologize if they have been covered already.

 

*******OPoC Accreditation

-    I agree with Ross (I think it was Ross from the last tele-conference)
and see this as an extremely hard thing to do.

 

**********Verification of OpoC by the Registrar

-    The Registrar would need to confirm that the OPoC is:

o  accredited 

o  as well confirmation from them that they are in fact the OPoC for each
and every domain name they are listed on

 

EG: domain name is registered by Party A and Party B is placed in as the
OPoC.  The registrar would need to verify that the OPoC is accredited and
that they are in fact the    OpoC for the particular domain name.

 

-    This verification would be required for all new and existing domain
names where the registrant and OPoC differs (no small task)

 

Registrar set as default OPoC

 

-    I know this was mentioned and from a registrar's point of view we would
not want this to happen.

-    The registrar would in some cases receive large increases in
correspondence (both legal and non-legal) thus creating costs associated
with processing

 

 

Privacy Protection

-    I know there are several concerns here about this not only from
individuals but also in trying to meet specific country privacy policies.

-    As there must be many different country privacy policies out there,
should this even be taken into consideration as there is no way that all
privacy policies will be able to be adhered to

 

What could be shown:

 

This probably goes into another wg but thought I would say it any way.

 

Registrant (I believe this is what is being looked at)

-    Name

-    City

-    Country 

 

Condition

-    This must be the actual registrant and cannot be a proxy or privacy
protection service

 

OPoC

-    Same as registrant

-    Appointed OPoC

-    Proxy / Protection Service

 

One reason to actually show the Registrant and not a proxy service is what
happens when (I say here when and not if) a Registrar goes off the rails
(Shuts its doors) and no-one can actually get access to the registrant
details. Proving ownership of those domain names then becomes extremely hard
if access to the Registrar's records is unable to be obtained and the whois
shows a proxy service which was run by that registrar. As far as I am aware
this has not happened but in this day and age it is possible. 

 

 

I am not sure if any of this is of help.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Peter Stevenson

Fabulous.com <http://www.fabulous.com/> 

peter.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

The information contained in this email is confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the
information in this email in any way.
Dark Blue Sea does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached
files.
The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the
views or opinions of Dark Blue Sea.
Dark Blue Sea does not warrant that any attachments are free from viruses or
other defects.
You assume all liability for any loss, damage or other consequences which
may arise from opening or using the attachments

 

 

 

  

  _____  

Need a vacation? Get
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48256/*http:/travel.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTFhN2hu
cjlpBF9TAzk3NDA3NTg5BHBvcwM1BHNlYwNncm91cHMEc2xrA2VtYWlsLW5jbQ-->  great
deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.