ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

[registrars] Problems with WHOIS data output

  • To: Steinar Grøtterød <Steinar.Grotterod@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [registrars] Problems with WHOIS data output
  • From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 10:00:27 +1000
  • Cc: <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcN72A6JGGHiz62DQKemXVyyi6VuEAQ2WDmwAACxF2AABV0UcAAY/maA
  • Thread-topic: Problems with WHOIS data output

Hello Steinar,

> 
> Has anyone considered there's no common requirements to the 
> whois output format! 

Yes - this is a known problem identified in the original WHOIS task force reports.


> 
> Defining a system where information to be placed in the 
> proposed form/template, both regarding the losing registrar 
> and Registrant must be parsed (or manually updated), will 
> create a complex system depending on the losing/present 
> Registrar whois-output.

Yes - it is less an issue with centralised registries.

With respect to the losing registrar notice, the information is available:
(1) from the registry WHOIS (the registrar information is included in the Verisign registry WHOIS) - although formats will vary between registry operators
(2) the registrant information is available from the losing registrars own database

With respect to the gaining registrar notice, the registrant information must be extracted usually from the losing registrars's WHOIS (although it is also avalabel in the central registries for biz, info, org).
This applies both to the current transfers policy as well as the new one.

Various members of this list - e.g Rick Wesson, Paul Stahura etc have discussed developing a standard format for data exchange at least between registrars.  The new CRISP protocol development may help standardize this exchange in time, although it maybe worthwhile for the registrars constituency to cooperate in developing a preliminary data exchange format (not necessarily exposed to the public).  Part of the problem here is that for some registrars the ratio between transfer in and out is vastly different, so there is little business incentive to cooperate.  This is why the GNSO began looking into transfers in the first place, as the registrars constitueny could not come to an agreement amongst its members.

Melbourne IT is certainly interested in cooporating on developing common WHOIS data formats for data exchange between registrars.


>
Regards,
Bruce



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