[At-Large] New Whois Access Audit posted
derek at aa419.org
Wed May 2 17:31:21 UTC 2012
On 5/2/2012 6:46 PM, Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> 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.
A Registrar has to provide both a web based whois lookup AND a port 43
direct look-up facility. I agree the wordign is rather obscoure for
the two registrars:
> • Two cases were attributed to either a website failure or distributed denial-of-
> service (DDoS) attack which contributed to the inability to access port 43
> WHOIS servers.
> 2. Why is rate-limiting considered a fail? This is put in place by responsible registrars to prevent scraping of Whois data by spammers.
It is not the rate limiting which is considered a fail, rather too
severe rate limiting.
We need to also note that many countries have invisible proxies which
causes an incorrect statistic on an IP address. I myself have done a
look-up and on the first look-up I encounter a "rate exceeded" error.
More information about the At-Large