EPP or IRIS doesn't really matter (although I think IRIS makes more sense). The point is that an XML based schema for transfer related Whois queries is a good solution. Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jens Wagner Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 4:40 AM To: Larry Erlich Cc: faure@globvill.de; registrars@dnso.org; Alexander Siffrin Subject: Re: [registrars] .net thick/thin discussion Larry Erlich schrieb:
Marcus Faure wrote:
Hello,
even with a thin model, the first point of contact is the registry, e.g. you have to go to the Internic whois first before you know which other whois to query. Therefore the registry must be monitored closely, but IMHO doing your own whois does not help here. Sitefinder is a keyword for this discussion.
As long as we do not have standardized whois output, a thin model is more difficult to deal with. I also think that the per-registrar thin model that Bruce proposed will cause this extra work, and honestly I do not believe that the average user understands it.
Can you explain what you mean by "honestly I do not believe that the average user understands it"?
What happened during the .ORG Transition? Didn't you receive many customer inquiries regarding the WHOIS? We sure did, as our customers were confused. We need to think more for the customer and to the benefit of the registrant himself instead of solely the registrar. The confusion beneath the registrants was exactlly due to the thick+thin-whois! There were a lot of problems regarding registrar transfers due to one registrar being "thin" and the other "thick", which resulted in more support --> higher costs!
A registration service provider can be handled with an optional maintainer field in the whois. We have one on the CORE whois that defaults to the
member
number, but can also contain a URL.
How are you going to translate the "optional maintainer field" in the registry whois output so that a registrant can understand who the reseller is? Are you going to ask the registry to lookup and display 2-3 lines of human readable information? And that they will agree to even make modification to add this field?
This should be proposed as an EPP extension anyway. At least one line of text per domain name should be usable for such purposes.
Will you also have the registry (if thick model) display the registrar in a human readable format? Or does the registrant have to do a further search with a code to find out, for example, who registrar "R33-LROR" is?
This is up to the registry. However there should be a webinterface that shows all informations 'pretty-printed'. Best regards, Jens Wagner CTO Key-Systems GmbH Key-Systems GmbH Prager Ring 4-12 66482 Zweibrücken Tel.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 50 Fax.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 51 Email: support@rrpproxy.net www.key-systems.net www.domaindiscount24.com www.RRPproxy.net www.Key-Fashion.de
Larry Erlich
Yours, Marcus