Completely disagree guys, and am writing an extensive message. I have to say that two days after we were due to report out, I am surprised/concerned/upset to be debating substantive policy matters. But the fact is that the idea of Thick WHOIS database for existing thin registries (and all, there are Four of them, have we ever discussed that fact?) is **already being debated**. They recognize that there may be intended and possibly considerable unintended consequences of the process. Am reviewing their work and will share shortly. Suffice to say, I think we have leapt headlong into policy... Kathy << Yes - there is not a difference in privacy by implementing a centralized interface to all the existing Whois pages. All the interface does is provide a single point of access to the same data versus multiple points of access (that would still be functional).

Lynn

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] From: "Smith, Bill" <bill.smith@paypal-inc.com <mailto:bill.smith@paypal-inc.com>> Date: Fri, December 02, 2011 10:02 am To: "lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com <mailto:lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com>" <lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com <mailto:lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com>> Cc: Emily Taylor <emily@emilytaylor.eu <mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu>>, "rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org>" <rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org>>, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de <mailto:lutz@iks-jena.de>>, "rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>" <rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>>

I agree with Lynn and Peter on this. I'm having difficulty understanding the privacy implications of better usability, other than more people would use the service but then that's the purpose of improved usability.

On Dec 2, 2011, at 4:39 AM, <lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com <mailto:lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com>> <lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com <mailto:lynn@goodsecurityconsulting.com>> wrote:

> I would like to get a better understanding of the. Objection or concern about Lutz's recommendation. If an interface is only implemented for .net and .com, it defeats the purpose and does not provide ease of access to all WHOIS registration data. > Lynn > > Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T > > -----Original Message----- > From: Emily Taylor <emily@emilytaylor.eu <mailto:emily@emilytaylor.eu>> > Sender: rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois-bounces@icann.org> > Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 08:28:15 > To: Lutz Donnerhacke<lutz@iks-jena.de <mailto:lutz@iks-jena.de>> > Cc: rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org><rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:rt4-whois@icann.org>> > Subject: Re: [Rt4-whois] No agreement on Lutz's recommendations > [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > Thank you for these constructive ideas. Apologies for my mistake on this one. I would like Kathy's view on the proposed wording before any sign offing this as I am aware it is something on which she has previously raised comments. > > Peter I think you meant thin registries didn't you? That would be a more accurate and precise version of what we agreed. This another one where (I think) we are all agreed on a minimum which in my view would represent a real step forward. What there is not consensus on is how far or whether such a look-up could or should be expanded. If is not already clear in the text we should find a way of expressing clearly that our proposal should not necessitate any transfer of databases, escrow or similar. It is simply a single look up point. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2 Dec 2011, at 07:35, Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de <mailto:lutz@iks-jena.de>> wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 03:05:13PM +1100, Nettlefold, Peter wrote: >>> "To make WHOIS data more accessible for consumers, the review team >>> recommends that ICANN should set up a dedicated, multilingual interface >>> website to help users access thick gTLD WHOIS data. >> >> Remove 'thick gTLD'. The scope is narrowed later. >> >>> This would be a smart web portal, that would assist users to access >>> publicly available WHOIS data. It is not envisaged that this would >>> replicate registry databases in any way, but instead help users by >>> providing a single centralised site through which to search those >>> databases, and to display the WHOIS data in an accessible way. >> >> Ack. (There is no reference zu gTLD.) >> >>> The review team has discussed the scope of this portal, and seeks >>> ecommunity views on whether it should only apply to thin gTLD registries, >>> or should instead provide a comprehensive gTLD search service." >> >> In order to be really useful, the system should be able to access any ICANN >> regulated WHOIS data (which includes ASN and IP). >> _______________________________________________ >> Rt4-whois mailing list >> Rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:Rt4-whois@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto:Rt4-whois@icann.org> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rt4-whois > > _______________________________________________ > Rt4-whois mailing list > Rt4-whois@icann.org <mailto: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

--