[At-Large] Issue Report on Thick Whois
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Tue Nov 22 14:51:30 UTC 2011
At 22/11/2011 03:25 AM, Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
>In iks.lists.icann.at-large, you wrote:
> > I have not yet reviewed the document in sufficient depth to say
> > whether I feel that it is complete, but on an initial review, it
> > looks fine. My personal belief is that the ALAC should strongly
> > support the initiation of a PDP on this issue.
>I'd strongly suggest to move to thin WHOIS approaches whererver possible.
>Thick WHOIS services requires privacy violations as well as violations of
>various local laws by transfering personal data outside of the jursidiction
>of the domain name holder.
>ICANN already started a thin WHOIS services by introducing whois.iana.org.
>In the thin WHOIS approach each WHOIS server only reports the necessary data
>in the associated registry (i.e. DS entries as well as Glue for NS, AAAA, A)
>and information about the contract on which the data was inserted or modified.
>Because the contract information contains a referal to the next WHOIS
>server, the chain of responsibility can be followed easily.
>Sorry, thick WHOIS is a thick mistake (especially for an "end user"
>stakeholder like AtLarge).
>PS: Please forgive me to not using the terminology from SAC051.
Thick Whois is required for all new gTLDs. Has At-Large/ALAC ever put
in a recommendation that ICANN specify Thin Whois instead for all new gTLDs?
More information about the At-Large