Sorry, forgot one thing. At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn <<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: âUpon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information â To: âUpon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information â
Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help.
See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad.
Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity. Alan
AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION."
I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make corrections.
"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in accordance with the accuracy specification.
Is this any more palatable?
Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain.
Alan
- Evan
The way I suggested to deal with Clause 3.7.8 concerns on the wiki might be cleaner. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:
Sorry, forgot one thing.
At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn <<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from: “Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…†To: “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…â€
Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help.
See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad.
Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity.
Alan
AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION."
I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make
corrections.
"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in accordance with the accuracy specification.
Is this any more palatable?
Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain.
Alan
- Evan
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Apologies for grouping this together in a single response. Carlton: I like your enumerated recommendations, but per Alan’s suggestion I think we need to spell out suggested language to avoid it becoming weak. The gap I’m trying to cover is between a public report and obligated action. So we need a fix to that text notwithstanding any additional changes which may be good. Alan, RE: “I can report that Knujon is obviously a made up name and is a willful attempt to mask your true identity. Or that "Garth" is clearly a fabrication. If the registrar knows that these are both legitimate, should you still be required to provide documentation of their validity to the registrar within 15 days or loose your domains?” The registrar can in fact validate this with information they already have from my payment data. I don’t want them deleting domains with impunity, and I’m happy to have more process which protects the registrant rights by requiring more due process. The problem I’m getting at is when the record has been shown without doubt to be forged and the registrar won’t act because they are no required to. Alan, RE: “Why is this needed when 3.7.8 starts with "Registrar shall comply with the obligations specified in the Whois Accuracy Program Specification"?” Aha, there’s the rub. Because the Accuracy specifications do not cover the language in the last paragraph of 3.7.8. If you break up the proposed 3.7.8 in three distinct sections, each starting with “Registrar shall” the first section obligates them to the Accuracy program; The second section refers to their regular obligations to validate; The third obligates the handling of inaccuracy reports from the public. So then what is in the Accuracy Program? The contents wholly refer to the obligations in the second paragraph. There is no language pertaining to the third paragraph within the specification. 3.7.8 remains unchanged in this respect. From: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 1:19 PM To: Alan Greenberg Cc: Evan Leibovitch; Garth Bruen at KnujOn; ALAC Working List Subject: Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 The way I suggested to deal with Clause 3.7.8 concerns on the wiki might be cleaner. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: Sorry, forgot one thing. At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn
<<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from:
“Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…†To: “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…â€
Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help.
See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad.
Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity. Alan
AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION."
I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make corrections.
"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in accordance with the accuracy specification.
Is this any more palatable?
Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain.
Alan
- Evan
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Garth, Look again and you see the language I proposed. -Carlton On Mar 27, 2013 1:43 PM, "Garth Bruen" <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Apologies for grouping this together in a single response.****
** **
Carlton: I like your enumerated recommendations, but per Alan’s suggestion I think we need to spell out suggested language to avoid it becoming weak. The gap I’m trying to cover is between a public report and obligated action. So we need a fix to that text notwithstanding any additional changes which may be good.****
** **
Alan, RE: “I can report that Knujon is obviously a made up name and is a willful attempt to mask your true identity. Or that "Garth" is clearly a fabrication. If the registrar knows that these are both legitimate, should you still be required to provide documentation of their validity to the registrar within 15 days or loose your domains?” The registrar can in fact validate this with information they already have from my payment data. I don’t want them deleting domains with impunity, and I’m happy to have more process which protects the registrant rights by requiring more due process. The problem I’m getting at is when the record has been shown without doubt to be forged and the registrar won’t act because they are no required to. ****
** **
Alan, RE: “Why is this needed when 3.7.8 starts with "Registrar shall comply with the obligations specified in the Whois Accuracy Program Specification"?” Aha, there’s the rub. Because the Accuracy specifications do not cover the language in the last paragraph of 3.7.8. If you break up the proposed 3.7.8 in three distinct sections, each starting with “Registrar shall” the first section obligates them to the Accuracy program; The second section refers to their regular obligations to validate; The third obligates the handling of inaccuracy reports from the public. So then what is in the Accuracy Program? The contents wholly refer to the obligations in the second paragraph. There is no language pertaining to the third paragraph within the specification. 3.7.8 remains unchanged in this respect. ****
** **
** **
** **
** **
*From:* Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, March 27, 2013 1:19 PM *To:* Alan Greenberg *Cc:* Evan Leibovitch; Garth Bruen at KnujOn; ALAC Working List *Subject:* Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8****
** **
The way I suggested to deal with Clause 3.7.8 concerns on the wiki might be cleaner.****
-Carlton ****
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================****
** **
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:****
Sorry, forgot one thing.****
At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:****
On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn****
<<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from:****
“Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…†To: “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…â€****
Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help.
****
See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad.
Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity.
Alan****
AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION."
I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make
corrections.
"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in accordance with the accuracy specification.
Is this any more palatable?
****
Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain.
Alan
****
- Evan
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) ****
** **
This? "When inaccurate WHOIS data is confirmed, the Registrar is required to <enumerate the actions>. Failure to act shall be a breach of contract and subject to compliance remedies previously agreed." From: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 3:08 PM To: Garth Bruen at KnujOn Cc: At-Large Worldwide; Alan Greenberg; Evan Leibovitch Subject: RE: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 Garth, Look again and you see the language I proposed. -Carlton On Mar 27, 2013 1:43 PM, "Garth Bruen" <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote: Apologies for grouping this together in a single response. Carlton: I like your enumerated recommendations, but per Alan’s suggestion I think we need to spell out suggested language to avoid it becoming weak. The gap I’m trying to cover is between a public report and obligated action. So we need a fix to that text notwithstanding any additional changes which may be good. Alan, RE: “I can report that Knujon is obviously a made up name and is a willful attempt to mask your true identity. Or that "Garth" is clearly a fabrication. If the registrar knows that these are both legitimate, should you still be required to provide documentation of their validity to the registrar within 15 days or loose your domains?” The registrar can in fact validate this with information they already have from my payment data. I don’t want them deleting domains with impunity, and I’m happy to have more process which protects the registrant rights by requiring more due process. The problem I’m getting at is when the record has been shown without doubt to be forged and the registrar won’t act because they are no required to. Alan, RE: “Why is this needed when 3.7.8 starts with "Registrar shall comply with the obligations specified in the Whois Accuracy Program Specification"?” Aha, there’s the rub. Because the Accuracy specifications do not cover the language in the last paragraph of 3.7.8. If you break up the proposed 3.7.8 in three distinct sections, each starting with “Registrar shall” the first section obligates them to the Accuracy program; The second section refers to their regular obligations to validate; The third obligates the handling of inaccuracy reports from the public. So then what is in the Accuracy Program? The contents wholly refer to the obligations in the second paragraph. There is no language pertaining to the third paragraph within the specification. 3.7.8 remains unchanged in this respect. From: Carlton Samuels [mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 1:19 PM To: Alan Greenberg Cc: Evan Leibovitch; Garth Bruen at KnujOn; ALAC Working List Subject: Re: [ALAC] RAA 3.7.8 The way I suggested to deal with Clause 3.7.8 concerns on the wiki might be cleaner. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: Sorry, forgot one thing. At 27/03/2013 01:01 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
At 27/03/2013 12:20 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
On 27 March 2013 11:47, Garth Bruen at KnujOn
<<mailto:gbruen@knujon.com>gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
Change the WHOIS Accuracy Specification #5 from:
“Upon the occurrence of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…†To: “Upon the REPORT OR DISCOVERY of a Registered Name Holder's willful provision of inaccurate or unreliable WHOIS information…â€
Agreed, though I think that "report" is sufficient. A discovery that is unreported can't be of much help.
See my e-mail just sent which explains why I think that "report" is overly broad.
Don't agree about omitting discovery. That covers the case where a registrar "discovers" the problem, likely due to one of the required checks mandated in the earlier sections of the specification. It does not make sense for a registrar to have to report the problem to itself, yet the predicate part of this sentence is what allows the registrar to disable the domain with impunity. Alan
AND modify the contract language of 3.7.8 from: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." To: "...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy AND IF NEEDED CANCEL OR SUSPEND THE DOMAIN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCURACY SPECIFICATION."
I'm OK with the intent, but would suggest something more explicit, that allows for a period of time to make corrections.
"...Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with a Registered Name sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with a Registered Name it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. Domains that maintain inaccurate information, after given reasonable time to be corrected upon notification, shall be cancelled or suspended by the Registrar in accordance with the accuracy specification.
Is this any more palatable?
Whois Accuracy Specification explicitly gives a 15 day window after which te registrar must disable the domain.
Alan
- Evan
ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
participants (3)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Carlton Samuels -
Garth Bruen