ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[dow3tf] Fwd: RE: TF3 Call

  • To: <dow3tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [dow3tf] Fwd: RE: TF3 Call
  • From: "Brian Darville" <BDARVILLE@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 10:42:27 -0400
  • Cc: <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-dow3tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Here is Bruce's email

>>> "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 09/21/04 08:47PM >>>
Hello Brian and Ross,

Following our joint phone call (Brian, Ross, Bruce, Steve and Ryan) on
25 August, I posted a summary on 8 September of the key areas where I
believe that WHOIS accuracy can be improved with the agreement of the
IPC and the registrars constituency.  The aim is to take small
achievable steps forward, evaluate the results, and then consider the
need for further improvements.

I have included this summary below.

Brian is right that no "agreement" has been reached - as this would
require the normal process to be followed with respect to draft reports
etc - but I had hoped that this would move the discussion forward from
the KL meeting by providing some agreed areas (between the IPC and the
Registrar representatives) for further work.  Certainly Ross and I
(speaking personally and not in my role as GNSO chair) would be
committed to moving forward with the changes outlined below.

I believe it would be appropriate if Ross posted the summary below to
the Task force list for discussion at the next TF call.

Also in our call there was an action on me to set up a teleconference
with ICANN staff with respect to discussing compliance with the current
WHOIS agreements.  I have not been able to set that up yet due to other
commitments, but I will do so.


The key clauses in the registrar accreditation agreement are:

" A Registered Name Holder's wilful provision of inaccurate or
unreliable information, its wilful failure promptly to update
information provided to Registrar, or its failure to respond for over
fifteen calendar days to inquiries by Registrar concerning the accuracy
of contact details associated with the Registered Name Holder's
registration shall constitute a material breach of the Registered Name
Holder-registrar contract and be a basis for cancellation of the
Registered Name registration."

"3.7.8 Registrar shall abide by any specifications or policies
established according to Section 4 requiring reasonable and commercially
practicable (a) verification, at the time of registration, of contact
information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar or
(b) periodic re-verification of such information. Registrar shall, upon
notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information
associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take
reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event
Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a
Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct
that inaccuracy."

(1) With respect to verification at time of registration:

The registrars constituency would prefer to focus on improving the
process for dealing with complaints, because adding verification at the
time of registration may be a significant cost burden across all
registrations, the vast majority of which are for legitimate purposes
and do not infringement any 3rd party IP rights.    

Improved verification can first be implemented when WHOIS data is
corrected following a complaint (see (2) below).  The effective of this
approach can then be evaluated prior to considering adding this at time
of registration.

(2) Reasonable steps to investigate inaccuracy

Reasonable steps can be clarified further to state that a registrar must
use at least one of email, phone, fax, or postal mail to notify a
registrant of a complaint about accuracy.  If one of these methods fails
(e.g receive a return to sender mail, email bounces, number is
disconnected, or there is no fax service connected to the number) then
another method must be used.  If all of email, phone, and fax fail, then
the name should be placed on registrar HOLD (ie the name
decommissioned). A registrant would still have 15 days to respond before
further action is taken.

To correct an inaccuracy  registrars (or their resellers) must verify at
least one of the following three data elements:
- phone, Fax, or email
Verification would take the form of:

- customer provides data
- registrars contacts customer using data
- customer confirms registration

A registrar may charge the registrant to recover costs of correcting the
inaccuracy and may place a name on Transfer LOCK during this process.
The pricing of this would be left to market forces.

To ensure effective measurement of the compliance with this policy, all
complaints should be lodged through the centralised WHOIS Data Problem
Report system.  Registrars must close cases lodged in the system to
report on how they have been resolved.   ICANN will be able to provide
regular public reporting on the number of complaints and the follow up
to these complaints.

(3) Extra steps to investigate inaccuracy

A complainant may pay a registrar for an extra inaccuracy investigation

A registrar in parallel will use all forms of contact to notify the
Post - via registered mail (to ensure receipt)

If all forms of communications fail - the name will immediately be
placed on HOLD, (or redirected to a notification website).  The customer
will have 15 days to respond.

When the registrant responds to update details, all of Email Phone Fax
will be individually verified.   Again at the cost of the complainant.

The advantage of this service is it will provide a concrete set of
contact details for further action by a complainant.  The cost of this
service will initially be left to market forces.  

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>