RE: [registrars] .net thick/thin discussion

[Paul Stahura <stahura@xxxxxxxx>]

Jens Wrote


>>Also, if they have this
>>responsibility they will put pressure on use to make expensive proactive
>>validity checks so that "their" outputted information is pristine.
>>
>They don't make more or less pressure than ICANN.

Huh? They pressure ICANN to pressure us.  Look at whois TF 3.

>>A thick
>>registry makes services such as whois privacy protection more difficult
(as
>>some of those types of services change, for example, the email address
>>periodically and therefore would have to communicate all those changes to
>>the registry).  Database synchronization is a problem with the thick
model.
>>
>DB synchronization by EPP is no problem at all, as long as contact 
>information contains all fields needed (which is required by ICANN 
>anyway). Providing an own whois service also requires some efforts and 
>cost involved for each registrar.

Huh2.  Every time the whois changes I have to tell the registry via EPP.
With whois privacy products these changes happen often, and without input
from the registrant.  That is a ton of database synchronization.   EPP was
not really built for database replication.

>>If the registries want to provide a universal whois service or need it for
>>some other purpose they can ask for the information and be white listed.
We
>>have too many protocols for moving the whois around, why move it with EPP
>>too?  Let's standardize on one: IRIS.
>>
>We have EPP around already. Not IRIS.

My point being that we will have 3 protocols to move whois: EPP,
whois-port-43 and IRIS.  We have the opportunity to get that to one.

>>Let's require the registrars to output it in a standard format but allow
>>optional output as well; the reseller information is only one type of
>>optional information that some of us choose to output.
>>
>This could be a good EPP extension as well.

Then all registries have to agree to all the various extra information types
each registrar currently chooses to output.  Then they really got even more
control over us.  Saying EPP is extensible is one thing, actually getting
just one registry to extend it (even for just one registrar's optional
output choice) is another.