Re: [weirds] Comments on draft-kucherawy-weirds-requirements-00

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 03:19 28-06-2011, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
>That's pretty much the same as the "no marketing / no abuse" clause 
>in ICANN's RAA.

I gather that the RAA document is the one at 
http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/ra-agreement-21may09-en.htm

The last compliance report mentions that:

   - Most registrars provide access to Whois data in a manner reasonably
     compliant with Section 3.3 of the RAA; representing a 99% compliance rate

   - Out of 970+ accredited registrars, 11 registrars had non-functioning Whois
     service.

   - Five registrars had overly aggressive rate-limiting policies.

Whois usage is commonly brought up in discussions about port 43 (e.g. 
draft-brunner-rfc954-historic).  I'll quote some text from denic.de:

   "This data has to be made publicly available for several reasons.  One
    evident reason is that it must be possible to contact domain holders if
    their domains as such or the use of them cause technical difficulties
    that might lead to disturbances for others."

 From nominet.co.uk:

   "The WHOIS makes it easier to identify the legal registrant of a domain
    name and should therefore help build more confidence in the use of the
    Internet."

I'll leave it to whoever knows the answer to elaborate on whether the 
RAA covers, for example, these two operators of Whois services.  The 
discussion about variants ( see 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg11080.html ) 
might shine some light on the scope of a somewhat similar problem.

In the words of Viviane Reding, "I always meet people who are 
astonished that Christmas is on the 25th of December".

Regards,
-sm