Re: [tf2-sg2] Whois chart with CC data
First, for the gTLDs, this chart basically shows what the registry
agreements with ICANN require to be published (with some discrepancies
notied under "remarks"). Is that what is being summarized with regard
the ccTLDs? Or is this more precisely a description of what Whois
actually displayed? If so, the chart seems to mix apples and oranges,
perhaps should be noted.
For the ccTLDs listed, most do not have ICANN agreements, so this is an
attempt to summarize what they actually gather and display. I will
note the distinction in text in the summary document.
Second, when my colleague Ryan Lehning ran a few Whois searches on
these ccTLDs, his results varied somewhat from what you have reported.
text below) Can you explain how your data was gathered? Of course
results Ryan obtained could be anomalous but I thought I would bring
discrepancies to your attention.
Ryan points to a couple of errors in my summary--I had flip-flopped
domain name and status in .pl. In other cases, there is simply a
question of terminology (registrar versus "agent" in .uk, "modified"
versus "updated", "registrant" versus "holder", etc.) Finally, he gets
confused by the fact that I persistently mixed up the symbols for
"optional" and "required but not implemented".
I think the discrepancies should all be resolved in the attached,
Description: Binary data
.uk: Jordyn indicate that that name of the registrar element is
but in searching "amazon.co.uk" that element was not indicated.
stated that registrant address is required by the registration
not implemented. In my search, the registrant address was returned.
Nominet's registration agreement is not entirely clear about what data
elements will be made publicly available. See Sec. 6 at
.de: Denic's terms & conditions do not clearly state what data
be made publicly available. In doing a search for "coke.de," I came
the following differences from what Jordyn indicates. Jordyn states
domain status is returned, I did not return this element. I returned
name as an element, while Jordyn did not. Jordyn states that
name is required by the "contract" (registration agreement?) but not
implemented, as noted above, I did not find this element in the Denic
The same is true of technical contact name, admin contact name, and
phone, fax, and email. I was able to return phone, fax, and email for
tech contact while Jordyn indicated that they were required by the
but not implemented.
.pl: I could not locate any contract or registration agreement for the
registry, following the website www.nic.pl. I did discover the
differences with Jordyn's chart using completewhois.com for a search of
amazon.pl. Jordyn indicates that last updated date is a data element
returned while I saw only a last modified date. Jordyn indicates that
registrant name is returned, while I only saw a registrant "handle."
also states that registrant organization and address are required by
contract but not implemented. I returned the registrant's address.
From: Jordyn A. Buchanan [mailto:jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 3:54 PM
Subject: [tf2-sg2] Whois chart with CC data
As you can see, I've added some ccTLD data. I'm also consolidating
and sending it to consolidation team.