Re: [registrars] Draft for TF2

[Thomas Keller <tom@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Paul,

good points. Please see my answers below:

Am 07.04.2004 schrieb Paul Stahura:
> Tom,
> 
> Why have the tech contact in the anonymous accessed data?

This has a kind of historical background. Thought that WHOIS
was initally designed to be able to reach a technical person
in case something went wrong with a domain name I figured
that this "basic feature" should be preserved. Since the tech 
contact is, in most cases, the registrar, webhost or dns provider 
in other words a company and not a private person this should 
not be a problem.

> And why not have the creation, expiration and update dates?

Easy answer, I just forgot to put them in ,-(. Writing this draft
it appeared to me that we never really discussed what data should
be shown and what not so I focused on the data fields which possibly
can contain private data.

> Also, many registrars display other, non-required information in the whois
> output such as the name of the reseller.  Your statement does not mention
> this data.  Should we explicitly mention that we want to continue to have
> the ability to display such non-required information as we choose?
> 
> How about the following for the anonymous accessed data set:
> 
> 1.1 	Name of the Registrant
> 1.2 	Country of the Registrant
> 1.3 	Name of the Admin-C
> 1.4 	Country of the Admin-C
> 1.5  	Name of the Technical Contact
> 1.6   Country of the Technical Contact
> 1.7 	Nameserver names 
> 1.8 	Registrar of record
> 1.9   Creation Date
> 1.10 	The non-auto renewed expiration Date
> 1.11	The Last Updated date (the date the whois info last changed)
> 1.12	The domain itself

I agree with one exception: The tech-c data should not be restricted
> 
> Also, does this apply only to gTLDs or also ccTLDs and sTLDs  ?

Since this is a GNSO effort the old policy as well as the new policy
can only be valid for gTLDs and sTLDS (which are only a subset of the gTLDs)
Registrars and Registries with binding ICANN contracts. I nevertheless
hope that the new standard will be widely adopted in the ccTLD world
as well.

> Wondering,
> Paul

Hope that helped.

tom

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Keller
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 2:53 AM
> To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: [registrars] Draft for TF2
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> please find attached my draft of the Registrar Constituency Statement
> for
> the WHOIS TF 2. 
> 
> I tried to incorporate all the registrar input I got over the course of 
> the last month as well as the findings of the TF2 data collection which 
> should be available for public review soon.
> 
> Please be advised that we have to formulate an offical statement on this
> topic
> until April 16.
> 
> Best,
> 
> tom
> 
> --
> 
> Thomas Keller
> 
> Domain Services
> Schlund + Partner AG
> Brauerstrasse 48         		           Tel
> +49-721-91374-534
> 76135 Karlsruhe, Germany               	Fax  +49-721-91374-215
> http://www.schlund.de                  	tom@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> 

Gruss,

tom

(__)        
(OO)_____  
(oo)    /|\	A cow is not entirely full of
  | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
  w w w  w