Re: [weirds] [Regops] Search Engines Indexing RDAP Server Content

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <> Fri, 29 January 2016 17:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42ED1A88BD for <>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qEYIiYhefoUf for <>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::261]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25D411A886B for <>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id s2so4623451oie.0 for <>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date:message-id :references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=9/co6nBqPl9fCAYN0M0G8xngaDerxNx99pgFZ55nLHM=; b=qrj/7nmQMqxu8N5Cixz9DUr3cDkxihMZvrpm83dcA7JC08O1PEDVaGbku9La2F39TS UCXRb2WopBWmV9KB0s7xolaTkqN9AsAfI19FRBySN7M3bV4FfYVF8e2dqm7ggS4ytlXT UsCVfwpPuvS7/C3rxrjOSvRa3wm95qHdc61LPRCsxETMJpbcnVFeSeIK+vGRbJL1Kthl UeGBUO8aOMoPFSqV6ATBnBuwoQCnIQDmosXHmXuRHZCZGOo3SbXO0MF5NOO+UjWqqIDl Xvku5VrXN9VyDCjCd7gLOXUrhXZoclOCXrFknNEdwSl7M0EnNn+AqTPvZrS2FIJ8YWKJ vpxA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:thread-topic:thread-index:date :message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language:content-language :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=9/co6nBqPl9fCAYN0M0G8xngaDerxNx99pgFZ55nLHM=; b=WAb4TlHS7iO4qLijBiLaCK+t4+Ru85iHs2iyw038u+TSureTaLwSUdfrDY9J9sFiHZ BoYvg1ND9MnlZlU6idsMRtMMknAf7qs34246SyKuOcrK9mhF5UW2+ycxBooh78GvrJUp E0QnRANb0FJ8drMu5e7ov6cOBCQ4KokHQwua25ve5ZICUpVDdeRgS3TAOViNNMOolUdY qO+WwjiCTM3TLdpDhsiOlWCdlSE8TpeHMuSzdswGbSmBsSfkqbgYbqHK0DfBqZTa+dYL z7Q3qWwyLFYffHlu9aBToV3tkJPzKdx1BbqWtsUmsIDrSHee8tnv7jkyNGtlT4+YjBZN OiiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTukv7DogU8UMvgfO5HjoxbrEC/bIIFeRPkLfIAusyxAzzI5yj6M5gaEqNq4mCb2ri+ZHZ5G5rMiVeu1Fd1wrds0juI
X-Received: by with SMTP id e65mr12947047qhd.64.1454088683423; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPS id x75sm1726919qkx.7.2016. (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:31:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (brn1wnexcas02 []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0THVNAi026582 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 29 Jan 2016 12:31:23 -0500
Received: from ([::1]) by ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 12:31:22 -0500
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <>
To: John Levine <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [weirds] [Regops] Search Engines Indexing RDAP Server Content
Thread-Index: AQHRWrTPLeNZLPJOwEOzSCpB2y+X758StVFwgABcqwD//63pkA==
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:31:21 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <20160129172338.51466.qmail@ary.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20160129172338.51466.qmail@ary.lan>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [weirds] [Regops] Search Engines Indexing RDAP Server Content
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "WHOIS-based Extensible Internet Registration Data Service \(WEIRDS\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:31:26 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Levine []
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:24 PM
> To:
> Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Subject: Re: [weirds] [Regops] Search Engines Indexing RDAP Server
> Content
> >We have a difference of opinion, because I tend to think that it's a
> *good* idea to restrict access
> >to *some* data based on a client's identify and level of
> authorization. I do not want *my* PII
> >appearing in search engine search results because it's accessible via
> Sorry, but I really don't understand what you want here.  There have
> been vertical WHOIS search engines forever that let you search WHOIS
> data in various ways.  Most of them charge money, but as often as not
> some access is free.  That horse left the barn a decade ago.
> The stuff that search engines can see is exactly the same as what
> casual users see.  If you're saying that you want to make some stuff
> unavailable to anyone who doesn't have a password, OK, but now aren't
> you running into the whole ICANN mess of what's in WHOIS and what
> isn't?

Yes, definitely. I see little point in deploying RDAP if all we get is JSPON-encoded WHOIS data. We have a tool that let's us fix the whole "all data visible to everyone" problem. We should try to use it.