RE: [ga] WHOIS accuracy, and name deletions

["Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" <mcade@att.com>]

Okay, a few "facts" seem necessary.


The "fifteen day thing" is existing policy.  

The WHOIS TF RECOMMENDED studying it, assessing problems, etc. THEY/TASK FORCE didn't create or change it. They reflected input from individuals, ISPs, Business users AND registrars that thought more examination was needed before any change, either to shorten, or to lengthen. Two members recommended that ICANN staff have discretion to be lenient in their implementation of the 15 day... etc. The rest of the TF supported including those comments in the final report.

Let me defend the registrars. As co-chair, I saw the registrars in this discussion on time frames for notification, seek to provide maximum protections to their customers... that would be all kinds of registrants, individuals, among them. Joop's concern about commercial registrars has not been validated by the TF experience in the input or behavior of the commercial registrars. :-) 

here's my point.... participating in the comment process is very helpful AND can change the recommendations of the TF. Criticizing it is a "game". The list is open, AGAIN, for comment. Until 1/9. I suggest that you take the time to post to the list.  

If you get a rejection, post to DNSO.Secretariat@dnso.org. The secretariat can help you. 

For anyone who has asked me, as co chair, I've posted for them directly to the TF itself. Other TF members have done the same. 






-----Original Message-----
From: Joop Teernstra [mailto:terastra@terabytz.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 7:58 PM
To: Thomas Roessler; George Kirikos
Cc: discuss-list@opensrs.org; ga@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [ga] WHOIS accuracy, and name deletions


At 12:57 a.m. 8/01/2003, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>On 2003-01-07 02:15:01 -0800, George Kirikos wrote:
>
> > Folks might not be aware of discussions going on in the WHOIS
> > accuracy task force of the DNSO/GNSO. See:
>
> > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-whois/Arc00/msg00806.html
>
> > for instance.
>
> > Am I the only one who is concerned that a legitimately held name
> > might be deleted due to a simple failure to respond within 15
> > days?
>
>You're certainly not alone with that concern.  But the 15 day period
>isn't new at all -- it's current policy, RAA 3.7.7.2.

And that illustrates how necessary it is that Individual registrants are 
actively represented in the policy making process.
15 Days can easily result in oppression. There must be safeguards.

If targeting "bad guys" is the justification, we are in for a lot more 
"summary takedowns".

Such unchecked powers must not be given to commercial registrars.


-joop-

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html