Re: [registrars] Thick registries

[Patrick <dnso-reg@gandi.net>]

On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0400, Rob Hall took time to write:
> I would encourage us to be careful when we start talking about "thick
> registries".  I believe this term is often used to describe a registry with
> centralized whois, as opposed to an actual thick registry.

I am sorry but you are redefining terms on which everyone agrees, so
I see no point to do that.

Thick registry = registry having contact objects and information
related to them, and managing a central whois (which is a direct
consequence).

If you want to describe other things, please do not overload current
words, and use other ones.

> There are currently 2 types of "thin" registries.  Those with distributed
> whois (like .com) and those with centralized whois (like .biz).

No.

> I suggest we be careful, and clearly distinguish between:
> 
> Thin Registries
> Thin Registries with centralized whois
> Thick Registries

This makes no sense to me.

> Too often we are refering to "Centralized whois" as a "thick" Registry and I
> believe this is fundamentally incorrect and dangerous.

I believe it is not.

Patrick.