December 2014 - gtld-tech - lists.icann.org

Whois advisory status
by Francisco Arias Dec. 22, 2014

Dec. 22, 2014

Dear colleagues, Just to let you know that ICANN is still reviewing the input received from you in writing and the teleconferences held this week. We plan to provide an status update in the first week of January. Best regards, -- Francisco.

2 1

Draft Updated WHOIS Clarification Advisory v.20141209
by Gustavo Lozano Dec. 21, 2014

Dec. 21, 2014

Hello colleagues, Attached you will find the Draft Updated WHOIS Clarification Advisory. Two versions are provided for your reference: clean version and redline against the original advisory (v 1.0) as published on 12 September 2014 (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/registry-agreement-spec4-raa-rdds-201 4-09-12-en). This draft version incorporates feedback gathered from various contracted parties, cases/emails sent to ICANN, the WHOIS Clarification Advisory meeting held at IETF 91 in November, and feedback sent to the gtld-tech mailing list. A conference call, with the objective of gathering feedback on this draft version, will take place on Tuesday 16 December 2014. If you want to participate in the conference call, please send me an email to fabien.betremieux(a)icann.org. Please send any feedback or questions you have on this version of the advisory to the mailing list as soon as possible, in order for ICANN Staff to discuss internally and provide an answer during the conference call. It's important to remember: * This advisory is not meant to create new requirements for contracted parties. * This advisory is not meant to redefine the WHOIS protocol. * This advisory resulted from questions sent by contracted and third parties seeking clarification on the Whois (RDDS) requirements in the New gTLD base RA and 2013 RAA. Regards, Gustavo ICANN

11 19

Re: [gtld-tech] host attributes issue
by Loesje Hermans Dec. 16, 2014

Dec. 16, 2014

Dear Francisco, After the conf call on the WHOIS clarifications I would like to clarify the issues we experience with host attributes and the current specs from ICANN about WHOIS. Since we are using the host attributes instead of host objects, we do not have a sponsoring registrar for hosts. According to the spec 4 of the registry agreement we do need to output these data in case of a nameserver query. In case we have a domain name in the zone that holds glue for a certain host, we could use the data of the sponsoring registrar of that domain name to output in the results of the nameserver query. But that will definitely not be the case for every host. What to display for the fields ‘Registrar’, ‘WHOIS server’ and ‘Referral URL’ in those cases? We also have no ROIDs for hosts. That leaves us with the only option of implementing clarification 32 and return all matching records. This will look weird since we have no data to fill in except for the Server name and the IP Address. As mentioned before, we do not have sponsoring registrars so the rest of the output fields will remain empty or will not be shown. Registrars will be enforced to specify glue when they specify a nameserver in the same domain as the domain name. Therefor we can only have multiple matches when performing a WHOIS query on IP address. Wouldn’t it be more logic to show all possible server names without any other keys in this case? Since the search was on IP, it is not really needed to output this IP address in every record. It would shorten the output and narrow it down to the relevant information. Kind regards, Loesje Hermans Functional Analyst +32 16 29 89 23 DNS Belgium vzw/asbl Ubicenter - Philipssite 5, bus 13 - 3001 Leuven www.dnsbelgium.be<http://www.dnsbelgium.be/> [cid:09ee086c0b7e41ef0f09e359060c1a61f817d422@zimbra]

1 0

Re: [gtld-tech] gtld-tech Digest, Vol 20, Issue 6
by Wodjenski, Sharon Dec. 12, 2014

Dec. 12, 2014

In addition to Alex's comments, I have the following questions/notes: I24. Fields in Whois output MUST NOT appear multiple times, unless otherwise explicitly specified. * Does this mean that only 1 Tech Contact can be displayed? If so, which one should be displayed if there are multiples? I was also especially confused by I29, 30, and 32 for reasons Alex mentions. II40. Responses to registrar object queries MUST show at least one admin contact and one technical contact. * Admin and Technical Contacts for Registrar are optional. So while there can be multiples, there also may be none. -----Original Message----- From: gtld-tech-bounces(a)icann.org [mailto:gtld-tech-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of gtld-tech-request(a)icann.org Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 7:00 AM To: gtld-tech(a)icann.org Subject: gtld-tech Digest, Vol 20, Issue 6 Send gtld-tech mailing list submissions to gtld-tech(a)icann.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to gtld-tech-request(a)icann.org You can reach the person managing the list at gtld-tech-owner(a)icann.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of gtld-tech digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Draft Updated WHOIS Clarification Advisory v.20141209 (Naoki Kambe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:35:28 +0900 (JST) From: Naoki Kambe <kambe(a)jprs.co.jp> To: gtld-tech(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [gtld-tech] Draft Updated WHOIS Clarification Advisory v.20141209 Message-ID: <20141212.153528.200378422.kambe(a)jprs.co.jp> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, One quick comment: One of the objectives of these clarifications is to retain the ability to easily parse the output. Interested users are encouraged to consider the clarifications below when developing parsers for RDDS output. The above objective doesn't seem much different from RDAP's one. I'm afraid the clarified WHOIS specification might reduce motivation to support RDAP. I'm curious about how we would migrate between WHOIS and RDAP in future. Regards, Naoki Kambe ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ gtld-tech mailing list gtld-tech(a)icann.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_l… End of gtld-tech Digest, Vol 20, Issue 6 ****************************************

1 0