On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>wrote:
Hi Alan and Christian
The first requirement for ANY whois database is accuracy and completeness. The most recent survey showed that only 8% of entries were complete and correct and less than 50% of the entries actually enabled the researcher to find a living person. So before anything else, ICANN should do something about the vast majority of incomplete/inaccurate entries.
These are interesting statistics Holly. Is there some sort operational audit mechanism that helps to pick these things up or is it largely self regulatory. From the survey, I am assuming that something exists. I agree that it is critical to ensure that the entries are complete and accurate.
Next, what the Whois review team is looking at is to recognise the
existence of privacy servers, have some criteria around them and then accredit them and ensure that, when necessary law enforcement agencies can have legitimate access (there are many issues within that sentence, but that's the direction they were going). No need for proxy servers because - at law - the registrar is the agent - and arguably therefore responsible for meeting all of the RAA requirements.
:)
Finally - the advantage of thick whois is that the local laws/protections etc apply. Before that, however, another of the Whois review team findings was that, in way too many cases, it is very hard if not impossible for the uninitiated to even find it. So one suggestion was that ICANN just provide a portal that can at least get a person to the database. The next issue then is whether the data is held centrally or locally (thick or thin) - and there are arguments for both.
My suggestion - press the Whois review team for their recommendations and respond accordingly.
Holly