Re: [nc-whois] TR: [Views On] New WHOIS Database Rules

[k@widgital.com (Kristy McKee)]

Hello Tony,

I am a bit strapped for time; but wanted to comment!

I do hope you or Marilyn, our chairs, will (as usual) send Mr. Keller a 
note letting him know:  1) his views are actually (according to the stats 
we have collected) in the majority and 2) the WHOIS TF and even the IETF 
agree with him (ie. the CRISP working group).



Hello Ruchika,

Please write an apology to Mr. Keller.  Your comments are out of line and 
could cause confusion.  The document you sent him to read is not a TF 
document and you are not a spokesperson for this TF.


Everyone, please Have a Great Day!

:)

~k

At 11:55 AM 4/8/2003 -0300, Antonio Harris wrote:
>Ruchika,
>
>It is not clear whether or not you replied directly to
>Bob Keller, as the message below is not addressed
>to him. Nonetheless, I dont recall instances wherein
>individual members of the Whois Task Force
>took it upon themselves to reply to comments
>received, and airing their views in that response.
>
>I realize it has been difficult for you to accomodate to
>working with a group, but even the "defunct" status with
>which you qualify the Whois Task Force, does not
>free the floor for you to assume the role of spokesman
>(spokeswoman?) for Whois matters.
>
>Since the original message was directed to the DNSO
>Secretariat, I would like other opinions from the "defunct"
>Whois Task Force members on the appropriate response
>to Bob Keller (for the record I agree with his views), if
>any procedural action is in order. If Bob Keller received
>Ruchika's reply, then I would propose we send a
>response that thanks him for his contribution and encourages
>him to stay tuned to further work on Privacy issues.
>
>Tony Harris
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ruchika Agrawal" <agrawal@epic.org>
>To: <DNSO.SECRETARIAT@dnso.org>; <nc-whois@dnso.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 10:50 AM
>Subject: Re: [nc-whois] TR: [Views On] New WHOIS Database Rules
>
>
> >
> >
> > Dear Mr. Keller,
> >
> > While your opinion/perspective is appreciated, policy-development for
>WHOIS
> > is not as simple as you've suggested below.  ;)  Please see the Privacy
> > Issues Report
><http://www.epic.org/privacy/whois/privacy_issues_report.pdf>
> > submitted by the non-commercial constituency - it discusses other types of
> > domain name registrants and other issues that should be considered in
> > determining appropriate WHOIS policy.
> >
> > The WHOIS Task Force is now defunct.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ruchika
> >
> > At 09:17 AM 4/8/2003 +0200, DNSO SECRETARIAT wrote:
> >
> >
> > >-----Message d'origine-----
> > >De : Bob Keller [mailto:bob@bobknet.com]
> > >Envoye : mardi 8 avril 2003 01:09
> > >A : secretariat@dnso.org
> > >Objet : New WHOIS Database Rules
> > >
> > >
> > >Ladies & Gentlemen,
> > >
> > >While I support the efforts to achieve a modicum of privacy in WHOIS
> > >lookups, I think it is also important to have "some" basic and essential
> > >information on Domain ownership available to the public.  For example, in
> > >doing business on the Internet, I believe it's important to be able to
>look
> > >up who owns a company web site, and where they are located -- for this
> > >often has a bearing on whether I choose to do business with the company
>or
> > >not.
> > >
> > >If the Domain Name is registered to a business, or if the domain is
> > >registered to an individual who is doing business on the Internet, why
> > >would any legitimate business or business owner NOT want ALL of the
> > >pertinent information relevant to the business to be available to the
> > >public?  I would certainly be suspicious of any business that would
> > >not.  Full disclosure of company information should therefore be
>mandatory
> > >in these cases.
> > >
> > >However, if a domain is registered to an individual and the site is being
> > >used for purely for non-commercial purposes, I support restricting the
> > >available WHOIS ownership information to Name, City and State only -- IF
> > >the individual desires such privacy.   It should be at the individual's
> > >option to have the balance of the domain registration information
> > >displayed.  Technical contact information should be displayed in its
> > >entirety, since this is often needed to contact web site or E-mail
> > >administrators, in the event of malfunctions.
> > >
> > >Thank you for reviewing my comments.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >Bob Keller
> >