I'm very much in favor of this recommendation. It puts ICANN in a position where it can succeed or fail to live up to its commitment to provide timely, public access to accurate WHOIS information. On Nov 30, 2011, at 3:24 PM, "Lutz Donnerhacke" <lutz@iks-jena.de> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 08:55:59PM -0200, Omar Kaminski wrote:
I agree with you from the users' pow, but how to make the access "unrestricted and public" with proxy servers that have a restrictive access by its own purposes, even for privacy reasons?
That's one of the problems with the AoC. We are not allowed to discuss the AoC, but have to take it a the guide to the expected future.
By interpeting the Consumer Inside Study a centralized "web search of Whois" seems to be the natural solution, because almost all private run services of this kind hide the results between advertisments (and confusing the reader), proclaming arbitary restrictions to the data access, suffer from such restrictions by the WHOIS server operators, or illegaly copy the data into their repository.
OTOH such a "web search" operated by ICANN has to opportunity to deal correctly with the data (in terms of the existing policies and local laws), is multilingual in the correct(TM) way, and can fullfil the AoC requirements. The last point is simple, because ICANN (as the operator) is bound to the AoC, and ICANN (as the operator) has contractual relationships with the WHOIS server operators.
If ICANN feels, that it can't run such a service as required by the AoC, ICANN is the only institution which has the power to *change* those requirements.
And all of those things comes for free (no policy involved, updated, required). _______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois