[APAC-Discuss] [WHOIS-WG] Thick Whois PDP

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

>
> Snip
>
> > at the delay in the GNSO doing anything on this issue.  Carlton has
> > referred to the ALAC statement on the think Whois.  We also commented
> > on the .com and .net contracts - decrying the fact that they did not
> > require a think Whois, even through all new gTLDs require it.
>
> No. Thick whois is the wrong approach. Entirely.
>
> But I will not discuss this further. I'm disappointed and frustrated.
>

Hi Lutz, hope all is well in Germany. I am sure there are many out there
who support the  Thin Whois approach and others the Thick Whois. What was
clear from the Whois Review Final Report is that as SSAC pointed out :

"*The answers to common questions about the “WHOIS” should be derived from
a clear*
*statement of the problem to be solved. To the extent that the answers are
different among **various use cases, solutions will likely be different. To
the extent that the solutions are **different, a single universal “WHOIS”
policy, as defined in the Review Team’s report, is **unlikely to be
effective or even achievable*."  [See page 4 of their comments on the Whois
Review Final Report]

We can see, that competing interests and rights are going to make this a
challenge. Clearly, there are some instances that will demand a Thick Whois
approach and others a Thin Whois approach.

I personally agree with SSAC's approach about the need for a single
consensus Policy , ie. Registration Data Policy as a *precursor* to
developing solutions (pg 4 of the SSAC055 Report):

• Why are data collected?
• What purpose will the data serve?
• Who collects the data?
• Where is the data stored and how long is it stored?
• Where is the data escrowed and how long is it escrowed?
• Who needs the data and why?
• Who needs access to logs of access to the data and why?

In my view, this is a logical framework where solutions can then be easily
tailored. The Whos Review Final Report highlighted the various concerns. Of
note is that the SSAC have recommended to the Board that they put together
a properly authorised committee to look at these questions and then
deriving a Policy from the answers.

One of the things I have personally felt about the Whois Review Final
Report was that it did not give out clear directions although it
highlighted the problems, recommended solutions but all very hazy and as
SSAC described it, a case of the blind men and the elephant where to each
his/her own. The SSAC's report is a clear means of bringing things to a
point of confluence and yes I agree with SSAC that a Registration Data
Policy is first needed.

Kind Regards,
Sala



_______________________________________________
> WHOIS-WG mailing list
> WHOIS-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/whois-wg
>
> WHOIS WG Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Whois+Policy
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851