Re: [council] Options for WHOIS purpose

["Ute Decker" <Ute.Decker@xxxxxxxx>]

Thank you Bruce, agree.  I will not be able to participate today but realize we 
may need move ahead with this. 


--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin
To: Council GNSO
Sent: Tue Jun 27 19:55:40 2006
Subject: [council] Options for WHOIS purpose

Hello All,

In light of the extensive feedback we have received this week, I believe
we have the following options:

(1) Revise definition of purpose

(2) Keep current definition, but expand on what that definition means

(3) Leave definition as is for now, until the task force completes its
work on recommending any changes to WHOIS (e.g changes to what is made
public, and how data that is not public can be accessed by legitimate
users).  Then re-evaluate the definition.


Lets discuss this further in the Council meeting tomorrow.

In any case, I recommend that the task force continue its current work
program.  Any work on purpose should be done at the Council level.

Note that in cases where the task force decides to remove certain data
elements from public access, the mechanism to access those elements may
or may not be called part of the WHOIS service in future, and may or may
not use the current port-43 protocol.  E.g We may end up with a revised
"WHOIS service", and a separate "Dealing with bad people" service, or
maybe a "Standard WHOIS service" and "Advanced WHOIS service".   Rather
than worrying about what it is called for now, or worrying about the
technical protocols, lets focus on the functional aspects.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin