RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Proposed Addendum to Proposals

[Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alan - Port 43 monitoring and compliance is an issue that I know ICANN monitors 
constantly in an automated fashion and enforces regularly. It is a topic I have 
spoken to them at length about and know the details of.
I think before we make any judgment on their ability and the work they do we 
should ask them about it. Making a judgment based on an unverified, 
non-reviewed story by someone in CircleID is not proof that there is a problem, 
especially from this author. 



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:32 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Proposed Addendum to Proposals


At 14/06/2010 04:54 PM, Jeff Eckhaus wrote:
>.....
>Those opposed to JN2 and other proposals seem to agree that 
>cross-ownership is appropriate, but that ICANN will not be able to 
>police any restrictions on data sharing between a registry and 
>registrar. They believe that we cannot simply rely on Registrars to 
>adhere to a signed agreement. Thus, because compliance will be too 
>difficult to enforce, we must limit cross-ownership.
>.....

For an interesting example of the level of registrar adherence to their signed 
agreements, and of ICANN's ability to monitor even simple things, take a look 
at http://www.circleid.com/posts/who_is_blocking_whois/ if you haven't already 
done so. NOTE: This had NOTHING to do with VI. But it is an example of a case 
where compliance is moderately easy, there is little to be gained by a 
principled registrar not following the agreement, and monitoring is not 
terribly onerous, albeit somewhat tedious if not automated.

Alan