Good point, James. ICANN should clarify / would centralize anyway, even to weigh / prioritize the stakeholders interests (as a pre-policy level). I remember to ask about this once, what kind of (most common) legal struggles arise from Whois use, or misuse worldwide? Do we have (ok, or need) access to those files? Omar 2011/7/6 James M. Bladel <jbladel@godaddy.com>:

Will do my best to join, but don't wait up for me. :) As far as the recommendations floated so far, I think some would be surprised at the degree to which I support /agree (at least in concept) with some of them. Overall, however, my concern is that we are straying in to recommending "solutions" for WHOIS policy, rather than reviewing ICANN's performance versus its commitments.  So my "brainstorm recommendations" might look something like: Findings: 1)  In the current WHOIS system, ICANN is trying to serve too many interests.  Some of which are mutually exclusive and in conflict. 2)  Therefore, it must fail some of its stakeholders/constituents at least some of the time.  And perhaps all stakeholders at some times. 3)  ICANN's WHOIS policy is unknown/poorly defined/decentralized/unevenly implemented. Recommendations: I)  ICANN should inventory its stakeholders and their critical WHOIS needs II)  ICANN should weigh / prioritize these interests, and manage the expectations of various stakeholders.    IIa) This may lead to a tiered WHOIS access model, where some interests are more closely regulated, and some are no longer free of charge. III)  ICANN should clarify / centralize its WHOIS policy and implementation. J.

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] Recommendations From: Kathy Kleiman <kathy@kathykleiman.com> Date: Tue, July 05, 2011 10:38 pm To: rt4-whois@icann.org

If I can do 1AM (Singapore), then I can do 6AM. :-) Looking forward to joining the call, Kathy

Since is targeted to 7 AM (I'm a late sleeper and it´s freezing here

...

specially in the morning), I'll listen to the recording.

Have a good call.

Omar

2011/7/5 Susan Kawaguchi<susank@fb.com>:

...

Hello,

The following are 4 recommendations and additional information surrounding my suggestions in the attached document.

1) Create Single WHOIS policy

2) Change to a Registry Thick WHOIS

3) Registrant pays for validation of WHOIS data

4) Create contractual agreements between ICANN and each Proxy/Privacy Registration service provider and impose standardized best practices

Considering the call is at 3 am pdt I will not be on the call I do not think I can add anything substantial to the discussion in the middle of the night.

Good luck and I look forward to listening to the recording of the call tomorrow.

Susan Kawaguchi

Domain Name Manager

Facebook Inc.

1601 California Avenue

Palo Alto, CA

Phone - 650 485-6064

Cell - 650 387 3904

Please note my email address has changed to skawaguchi@fb.com

NOTICE: This email (including any attachments) may contain information that is private, confidential, or protected by attorney-client or other privilege. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, or retransmit the email or its contents.

_______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

_______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

_______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois

_______________________________________________ Rt4-whois mailing list Rt4-whois@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois