Re: A translation (was Re: An update from the ICANN ISPCP meeting...)

[David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>]

Barry,

On Oct 27, 2014, at 10:28 AM, Barry Shein <bzs () world std com> wrote:
> Oh no! The Four Horsement of the Infocalypse!

Being dismissive of concerns related to illegal activities that make use of the DNS does not, of course, make those 
concerns go away. A number of folks make use of the registration database in attempting to address illegal activities, 
as such it seems to me that it would be useful if that database was accurate.

> It's the old problem,

Not really.

> crooks don't hand out business cards.

Registration data is used to identify registrants, not crooks. As Mark Andrews pointed out, there are uses for 
identifying non-crook registrants. In rare cases, registrants are crooks and while I'd agree the sophisticated crooks 
will find ways around any requirements for accuracy, I believe there is value to having accuracy in the general case.

Or are you arguing we should simply remove Whois as a service available to the Internet?

> And, again, at what cost, and to whom?

The cost obviously depends on the requirements and implementation.

The whom is and will always be the registrant.  However, for the vast majority of registrants with a handful of 
domains, the costs are likely to be in the pennies. Granted, for the domainers with huge portfolios, the costs may be 
significant, however that is a cost of doing that particular business.

> > That is one part of the outcome of ICANN's ongoing effort to try to fix the multiple decade long nightmare that is 
> > Whois, yes.
> It needs a public examination. This is a big change.

Agreed! And, in particular, it would be nice if network operators, who I believe make non-trivial use of Whois examine 
that change and determine whether the changes meet their requirements and if not, dare I say, participate in ICANN to 
make sure it does.

Regards,
-drc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail