[At-Large] New Whois Access Audit posted
Antony Van Couvering
avc at namesatwork.com
Wed May 2 16:46:01 UTC 2012
The study seems flawed to me.
1. Why if it has to do with Port 43 are unreachable websites considered a fail? That would make sense for web-based Whois, but not for Port 43.
2. Why is rate-limiting considered a fail? This is put in place by responsible registrars to prevent scraping of Whois data by spammers.
On May 2, 2012, at 8:57 AM, Bill Silverstein wrote:
> Why is there a compliance rate of less than 100%??
> Why not identify the non-compliant registrars?
> Why not terminate the non-compliant registrars?
> In the past, I have found that registrar compliance and enforcement from
> ICANN to
> be a joke. The failure to include the public as 3rd party beneficiaries
> and the failure of ICANN to do meaningful enforcement makes much of the
> RAA a joke.
>> A new Whois Port 43 Access audit has been posted -
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
More information about the At-Large