IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Proposal: Whois over DNS

Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> Mon, 08 July 2019 21:42 UTC

Return-Path: <woody@pch.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665DC12034F for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eEjCSaSUVyVj for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pch.net (keriomail.pch.net [206.220.231.84]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9137212032F for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Footer: cGNoLm5ldA==
Received: from [10.19.48.53] ([69.166.14.2]) (authenticated user woody@pch.net) by mail.pch.net (Kerio Connect 9.2.7 patch 3) with ESMTPSA (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 14:42:33 -0700
From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>
Message-Id: <E45936AC-3CBF-4E09-8F1B-311EAA482BC1@pch.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0F9AD68D-0A03-4F7D-962B-935A41E2E76F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 14:42:25 -0700
In-Reply-To: <1CA7BF1B-DF50-443B-9219-55259835FE23@bambenekconsulting.com>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
To: John Bambenek <jcb=40bambenekconsulting.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <1CA7BF1B-DF50-443B-9219-55259835FE23@bambenekconsulting.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/1AyUSLCfbj3aGa0EzONIaZsHoxA>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Proposal: Whois over DNS
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 21:42:50 -0000


> On Jul 8, 2019, at 2:38 PM, John Bambenek <jcb=40bambenekconsulting.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> All-
> 
> In response to ICANN essentially removing most of the fields in WHOIS for domain records, Richard Porter and myself created a draft of an implementation putting these records into DNS TXT records. It would require self-disclosure which mitigates the sticky issues of GDPR et al. Would love to get feedback.

Good in principle, but the information in whois has always been, at least nominally, third-party vetted.  This would not be.  So my worry is that either it would get no uptake, or it would get filled with bogus information.  It’s a little hard for me to imagine it being widely used for valid information, though that would of course be the ideal outcome.

So, no problem with this in principle, but I’d like to see some degree of consensus that user-asserted content is sufficient for people’s needs.

                                -Bill

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email