[nc-whois] Re: whois: some questions...

[Louis Touton <touton@icann.org>]

Thomas,

Here's the language I suggest for paragraph 6:

    6.  By following the procedures recommended above, registrars can
improve the accuracy of contact details in Whois.  These procedures do
not address all situations that may arise requiring registrar action to
address inaccurate or unreliable Whois data, and are not intended to
replace registrars' obligations in their accreditation agreements to
investigate and correct inaccuracies.

---

See other comment below.

Louis

Thomas Roessler wrote:
> I'm currently trying to incorporate the changes we made during the
> call.  In some sections, there are some open questions.
> 
> 
[snip]
> 
> I'm not entirely sure about the status of the Commission's
> submission. Steve's proposed changes would "downgrade" this to a
> single department's submission, and from our discussion, I'm not
> sure this is appropriate. Louis?
> 

Thomas--I'm not sure what language from Steve you are talking about.
But I don't see any grounds at this point for treating the EC submission
as the submission of a single department.  It was prepared by the
Internal Market DG in cooperation with Information Society DG, and it
explicitly states: "The European Commission has read the reports of the
ICANN Whois Task Force with great interest and would like to
comment . . . ."  On its face, it is not restricted to a particular
unit.

>