Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1315
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST            Sunday, July 7 2002            Volume 01 : Number 1315

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 11:49:22 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] Condolances

In that we have several members on this list from the great state of
Texas: and that that state has always reached out to others in times of
need.

I pray for it's deliverance from it's current problems of flooding and
hope the best for who suffer.

Stand proud and together Texas and you will weather yet this storm.

Eric

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Hello,

I found the following story interesting:

http://www.demys.net/news/02_jul_02_oecd.htm

Hopefully the WHOIS taskforce is watching. I agree with the OECD's
position, that WHOIS accuracy affects the stability of the internet.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

P.S. The "raw" links to the OECD are:

http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00031000/M00031923.pdf
http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00027000/M00027316.pdf

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 18:47:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I found the following story interesting:
>
> http://www.demys.net/news/02_jul_02_oecd.htm
>
> Hopefully the WHOIS taskforce is watching. I agree with the OECD's
> position, that WHOIS accuracy affects the stability of the internet.

I disagree.  The stability of the internet is not dependent on the whois
engines.  It can just as easily be argued that whois accuracy can be a
violation of a citizens rights to privacy, especially in some europrean
countries.

The whois was simply a means of contacting authority and techs for a
specific contact record, be it domain, contact, nameserver network etc.
If something went boink - you had a means of contacting a responsible
person.

thats all it is.  what it is not is a tool for lawyers.  man disagree but
thats the way it is.  the .god and .satan whois engines allow for privacy.
i suspect based on our past history that much of the fraud found in the
united states whois is system is simply people seeking their right to
privacy.

all this whois stuff is a bit of a red herring.  people will run their
whois's as they deem fit and those who anticipate user privacy needs as we
did will rule the day.

stability of the internet is based on tamper proof protocols and not the
accuracy of domain name search engines.

regards
joe baptista
www.dot-god.com

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 15:59:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Karl Auerbach <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, George Kirikos wrote:

> Hopefully the WHOIS taskforce is watching. I agree with the OECD's
> position, that WHOIS accuracy affects the stability of the internet.

I have never heard anyone make a credible claim that accuracy of "whois" 
for DNS has any affect whatsoever on the *technical* stability of the 
Internet.  Whois claims generally come from trademark owners who whine 
about how expensive it is to use legal processes; there might be merit in 
that, but it is not an issue affecting the technical stability of the net.

On the other hand, the accuracy of the "whois" for IP address allocations
is important when tracking down problems and attacks.

All the brouhaha about "whois" is focused on the former kind of whois and
not on the latter.

If you are concerned about tracking down spammers and those who run 
accused services, such as web sites accused of engaging in bad behaviour, 
you are much more likely to reach a responsible person via the IP address 
whois data than the DNS data.

It is possible to establish an anonymous DNS registration service.  And
given the low cost of maintaining such a service, the operator might chose
not to recover costs directly from the registrants.

Such a system would not endanger the internet one whit, although it might 
tick off trademark owners who would then have to resort to actual legal 
procedures with things like due process and fair procedures.

		--karl--

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 19:49:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Karl Auerbach wrote:

> Such a system would not endanger the internet one whit, although it might
> tick off trademark owners who would then have to resort to actual legal
> procedures with things like due process and fair procedures.

lions and tiggers and bears - OH MY!

Correct anonymous dns facilities - whois is critical to some fundamental
rights - i.e. privacy.

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 19:07:59 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Joe and all assembly members,

  We {INEGroup] agree with you on this Joe, as you likely know.
Indeed stability of the DNS or the Internet as a whole certainly
does not depend even in the slightest on WHOIS.

Joe Baptista wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, George Kirikos wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I found the following story interesting:
> >
> > http://www.demys.net/news/02_jul_02_oecd.htm
> >
> > Hopefully the WHOIS taskforce is watching. I agree with the OECD's
> > position, that WHOIS accuracy affects the stability of the internet.
>
> I disagree.  The stability of the internet is not dependent on the whois
> engines.  It can just as easily be argued that whois accuracy can be a
> violation of a citizens rights to privacy, especially in some europrean
> countries.
>
> The whois was simply a means of contacting authority and techs for a
> specific contact record, be it domain, contact, nameserver network etc.
> If something went boink - you had a means of contacting a responsible
> person.
>
> thats all it is.  what it is not is a tool for lawyers.  man disagree but
> thats the way it is.  the .god and .satan whois engines allow for privacy.
> i suspect based on our past history that much of the fraud found in the
> united states whois is system is simply people seeking their right to
> privacy.
>
> all this whois stuff is a bit of a red herring.  people will run their
> whois's as they deem fit and those who anticipate user privacy needs as we
> did will rule the day.
>
> stability of the internet is based on tamper proof protocols and not the
> accuracy of domain name search engines.
>
> regards
> joe baptista
> www.dot-god.com
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 20:04:37 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

I ain't buying any of this WHOIS crap being good for my Internet.

There are too many technical dealy bops that allow real folks to find out what
is happening.
Just putting out every persons name and address is a bunch of garbage.  There
is absolutely no valid reason for publishing all my daughter's personal
information just because she wants a domain name.
This is total bullshit and everyone knows it only came about to make it easier
for IP owners to sue squatters.
It is time to end this total invasion of privacy. STOP THE MADNESS!

Eric

Karl Auerbach wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, George Kirikos wrote:
>
> > Hopefully the WHOIS taskforce is watching. I agree with the OECD's
> > position, that WHOIS accuracy affects the stability of the internet.
>
> I have never heard anyone make a credible claim that accuracy of "whois"
> for DNS has any affect whatsoever on the *technical* stability of the
> Internet.  Whois claims generally come from trademark owners who whine
> about how expensive it is to use legal processes; there might be merit in
> that, but it is not an issue affecting the technical stability of the net.
>
> On the other hand, the accuracy of the "whois" for IP address allocations
> is important when tracking down problems and attacks.
>
> All the brouhaha about "whois" is focused on the former kind of whois and
> not on the latter.
>
> If you are concerned about tracking down spammers and those who run
> accused services, such as web sites accused of engaging in bad behaviour,
> you are much more likely to reach a responsible person via the IP address
> whois data than the DNS data.
>
> It is possible to establish an anonymous DNS registration service.  And
> given the low cost of maintaining such a service, the operator might chose
> not to recover costs directly from the registrants.
>
> Such a system would not endanger the internet one whit, although it might
> tick off trademark owners who would then have to resort to actual legal
> procedures with things like due process and fair procedures.
>
>                 --karl--
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 23:03:35 -0700
From: Kent Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 03:59:34PM -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> On the other hand, the accuracy of the "whois" for IP address allocations
> is important when tracking down problems and attacks.

In practice one uses both kinds of whois data, as well as whatever other
information one can find (email headers, addresses and phone numbers in
web pages, etc), in tracking down problems.  Whois for DNS is frequently
much more specific than whois info for ip address allocations, and can
be quite useful.  It is also frequently less useful than it could be, of
course. 

> All the brouhaha about "whois" is focused on the former kind of whois and
> not on the latter.
> 
> If you are concerned about tracking down spammers and those who run 
> accused services, such as web sites accused of engaging in bad behaviour, 
> you are much more likely to reach a responsible person via the IP address 
> whois data than the DNS data.

This is circular reasoning.  The main reason for lack of effectiveness of
DNS whois in finding problems is *precisely* that DNS whois is not
maintained very well, and is very easy to fake.  This is exactly the
question at issue.  *If* DNS whois were accurate, then it would be a
highly effective way to reach the problem source. 

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 23:19:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick Wesson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:

> This is circular reasoning.  The main reason for lack of effectiveness of
> DNS whois in finding problems is *precisely* that DNS whois is not
> maintained very well, and is very easy to fake.  This is exactly the
> question at issue.  *If* DNS whois were accurate, then it would be a
> highly effective way to reach the problem source.

It would also be a great marketing tool if the whois was completely
accurate. My whois interies are correct and I pay the price, over 200
spam/uce get throu my filters eaver day. thousans of messages are turned
away.

Clean up the inappropiate use of whois data and maybe folks will register
properly. To day ICANN has not completed a single investigation into whois
abuse an/or abuse of TLD zone files, used to walk the whois.

It is a completely valid reaction to use inaccurate information in a whois
entry to avoid spam/uce and other marketing liturature, I get at lease on
peace of junk mail per day sent to addresses listed in a whois database.

If we want these systems fixed we need to understand the social reasons
that folks register inaccurate information, Occam's Razor comes to
mind....

- -rick

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

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 23:41:05 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: [ga] life is not so great

So I threw down the book and screamed that the communist countries have
changed and my good friend and roommate denied my thoughts.  So I
slammed the door and demanded that my kids spend more time on the
Internet and learn.  We have issues to debate and come up with
solutions.

Digital divide and cultural bias are not so cool.  Damn it is hard. But
we have a job to do and we will damn well do it.  Our friends in places
like Afghanistan, Bosnia, Israel and Argentina demand it.  We are
blessed to be able to debate these issues.  Don't stop, keep the heat on
and keep the fire kindled.  Until it is right do not rest.

My boys and girls suffering from agent orange exposure and amputations
need your help.  And all we ask is that you help make it easier and more
reliable for my surgeons and paramedics to communicate.  From Oregon to
the Mekong Delta, from Bethesda to Zaire.
We don't want your money just that you stand up and fight to keep our
internet open and representative.

WLS is wrong.
the Blueprint is wrong.
our treatment of the Atlarge is wrong.
Whois is wrong.

Come on get the lead out and move it.

Eric

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 00:00:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Karl Auerbach <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:

> > If you are concerned about tracking down spammers and those who run 
> > accused services, such as web sites accused of engaging in bad behaviour, 
> > you are much more likely to reach a responsible person via the IP address 
> > whois data than the DNS data.
> 
> This is circular reasoning.  The main reason for lack of effectiveness of
> DNS whois in finding problems is *precisely* that DNS whois is not
> maintained very well, and is very easy to fake.  This is exactly the
> question at issue.  *If* DNS whois were accurate, then it would be a
> highly effective way to reach the problem source.

Considering that the author if the previous paragraph has admitted that he
has forged names and addresses, he can attest to how easy it is to do,
thus rendering DNS whois information, even if accurate, generally useless.

IP numbers, unlike DNS names, are much harder to spoof - oh yes, they can
be spoofed on source addresses, but as useful destination addresses,
unless they are consistent with routing, they aren't particularly useful.  
Because of this built-in technical pressure for addresses to be accurate,
one can place more trust that one is using the IP based whois with a valid
lookup-key.

The interests of a few trademark owners is hardly a reason to use a system
- - DNS whois - that is highly susceptable to false or erroneous data and,
when accurate, is a major violation of privacy.

I have heard that the author of the quoted paragraph was the originator of 
the rather good idea that each zone should have a well known TXT record 
containing highly stylized whois information - in other words, each 
domain name operator becomes his/her own whois publisher without the need 
for a central repository.

Except for domain names, I know of no non-dangerous instrumentality for
which the purchaser is required to divulge private information onto a
public register that has no form of access control and that conforms to no
privacy regime, no matter how minimal or weak.

In addition, any acceptable whois, whether it be for IP or DNS, ought to
conform to the standard set of privacy principles - among which are that
those who query the data must prove their legitimate need for the data,
identify themselves, prove their identity, and be known to the data
subject.

		--karl--

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 01:21:22 -0700
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Sunday, July 07, 2002, 12:00:04 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote:

> Except for domain names, I know of no non-dangerous instrumentality for
> which the purchaser is required to divulge private information onto a
> public register that has no form of access control and that conforms to no
> privacy regime, no matter how minimal or weak.

Do you own property here in California, Karl?

Or should I just check with DataQuest or one of the other county
property ownership record aggregators?

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 04:02:41 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Kent and all assembly members,

Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 03:59:34PM -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > On the other hand, the accuracy of the "whois" for IP address allocations
> > is important when tracking down problems and attacks.
>
> In practice one uses both kinds of whois data, as well as whatever other
> information one can find (email headers, addresses and phone numbers in
> web pages, etc), in tracking down problems.  Whois for DNS is frequently
> much more specific than whois info for ip address allocations, and can
> be quite useful.  It is also frequently less useful than it could be, of
> course.
>
> > All the brouhaha about "whois" is focused on the former kind of whois and
> > not on the latter.
> >
> > If you are concerned about tracking down spammers and those who run
> > accused services, such as web sites accused of engaging in bad behaviour,
> > you are much more likely to reach a responsible person via the IP address
> > whois data than the DNS data.
>
> This is circular reasoning.  The main reason for lack of effectiveness of
> DNS whois in finding problems is *precisely* that DNS whois is not
> maintained very well, and is very easy to fake.  This is exactly the
> question at issue.  *If* DNS whois were accurate, then it would be a
> highly effective way to reach the problem source.

  This is of course a nice blanket statement.  However it lacks
specific substance.  Hence the question remains in this context:
How can WHOIS become and effective way to reach the
problem source without violating the privacy of the registrant?

  Other questions of a more indirect context are:
Should WHOIS be a tool to be used as a method
of harassing or otherwise interrupting the time of
Registrants by the IP legal community?

  Should protections in the data fields in a WHOIS
Record for a specific Domain Name be opt-in
and/or Opt-out at the time of registration by the Registrant
much as it is for Credit and Credit card information
regarding the Card holder/user?  Would not such
a protection be in keeping with the DOC/NTIA's
policy of "Do no harm"?

  Is not admin. E-Mail address, Admin Mailing address
phone and fax (If applicable), phone numbers adequate information
or accurate to which effective to reach a problem source?

>
>
> Kent
> --
>

Regards,
- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 04:11:22 -0700
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

WXW and all assembly members

William X Walsh wrote:

> Sunday, July 07, 2002, 12:00:04 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > Except for domain names, I know of no non-dangerous instrumentality for
> > which the purchaser is required to divulge private information onto a
> > public register that has no form of access control and that conforms to no
> > privacy regime, no matter how minimal or weak.
>
> Do you own property here in California, Karl?
>
> Or should I just check with DataQuest or one of the other county
> property ownership record aggregators?

  Does it matter if anyone owns property in Calif.?  No, it doesn't
in this context.

  BTW Property ownership record aggregators are not
complete as they do not list physical property held
in a Trust and are highly inaccurate otherwise
as well.

>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
> Save Internet Radio!
> CARP will kill Webcasting!
> http://www.saveinternetradio.org/
>
>

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 18:11:18 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] new elections for icannatlarge.com approaching

At 06:44 7/07/02, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>
> > ....However, if you are interested in participating to
> > icannatlarge.com or, more generally speaking, in defending the role of the
> > public in the technical administration of the Internet, we encourage you to
> > immediately start to do the following:
>
>I do not see the logic that leads from your premise to your conclusion.
>The people who you elect will have no more power to affect ICANN's
>decisions than they do now - zero.
>
>You are substituting toys for real life.

Dear Karl,

Perhaps you are so focused on ICANN that it has become the only 
"real"  thing for you.
Yet, you know that an election , even a rushed one, for an organization 
that represents DNS users independently from ICANN, has an objective value.
Call icannatlarge.com a toy, your privilege as a member.
All organizations start from humble beginnings and the more we see that 
ICANN or its helpers is trying to sideline this organization, the more we 
know that we are on the right track to something that ultimately *can* 
effectively "defend the role of the public" as Vittorio calls it.

Sure, for the moment it will make zero difference in ICANN's decisionmaking 
processes, but that is no reason not to be taking those first tortured 
steps on the long road.

- --Joop

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 18:45:29 +1200
From: Joop Teernstra <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

At 20:21 7/07/02, William X Walsh wrote:

>Do you own property here in California, Karl?

Ownership records for property have very specific legal reasons for existing.
Yet, when they were legislated, no -one foresaw that a time would come that 
they would be accessible by *anyone* at any time.

>Or should I just check with DataQuest or one of the other county
>property ownership record aggregators?

Protections against abuse of  such accessibility still have to be written 
into Law.

- --Joop

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 08:23:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Kent Crispin wrote:

> This is circular reasoning.  The main reason for lack of effectiveness of
> DNS whois in finding problems is *precisely* that DNS whois is not
> maintained very well, and is very easy to fake.  This is exactly the
> question at issue.  *If* DNS whois were accurate, then it would be a
> highly effective way to reach the problem source.

Garbage.  There is no such thing as the DNS whois.  I think i've only
found this beast in the fairy land called ICANN.  Like I said earlier -
this argument is a red herring.

joe baptista
www.dot-god.com

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 08:28:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sun, 7 Jul 2002, Karl Auerbach wrote:

> I have heard that the author of the quoted paragraph was the originator of
> the rather good idea that each zone should have a well known TXT record
> containing highly stylized whois information - in other words, each
> domain name operator becomes his/her own whois publisher without the need
> for a central repository.

We already do this in the inclusive namespace.  I established a few years
back a tldtag system which uses TXT records to provide whois information
for top level domains.

regards
joe baptista
www.dot-god.com

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

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 07:48:56 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Somebody clue me in here.  I have run all this Whois stuff through
several
that are more technically inclined than I, and I just get laughed at.

The only issues involved in whois is privacy versus IP interests and
spamming.
Like Joe says "a few years ago".
All debates in the technical area of Whois are red herrings.
Individual rights versus corporations is the only issue.

Eric

Joe Baptista wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Jul 2002, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > I have heard that the author of the quoted paragraph was the originator of
> > the rather good idea that each zone should have a well known TXT record
> > containing highly stylized whois information - in other words, each
> > domain name operator becomes his/her own whois publisher without the need
> > for a central repository.
>
> We already do this in the inclusive namespace.  I established a few years
> back a tldtag system which uses TXT records to provide whois information
> for top level domains.
>
> regards
> joe baptista
> www.dot-god.com
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> Send mail to [email-masked] 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 [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 07:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

Hello,

- --- Karl Auerbach <[email-masked]> wrote:
> The interests of a few trademark owners is hardly a reason to use a
> system
> - DNS whois - that is highly susceptable to false or erroneous data
> and,
> when accurate, is a major violation of privacy.

It's not only the IP community who is in favour of an accurate WHOIS.
Law enforcement would like it to be accurate. As would businesses and
individuals who want to know who they're dealing with when conducting
electronic transactions, or who need to trace the sources of various
publications, etc. These aren't medical or criminal records being
published over the 'net -- those are what I would consider "major
violations of privacy."

> Except for domain names, I know of no non-dangerous instrumentality
> for
> which the purchaser is required to divulge private information onto a
> public register that has no form of access control and that conforms
> to no
> privacy regime, no matter how minimal or weak.

Many business licenses/incorporations allow for anyone to look up who
the owner/directors of that business are, although it depends on the
jurisdiction, perhaps. Exercise for readers: A domain name can be a
dangerous instrument! ;)
 
> In addition, any acceptable whois, whether it be for IP or DNS, ought
> to
> conform to the standard set of privacy principles - among which are
> that
> those who query the data must prove their legitimate need for the
> data,
> identify themselves, prove their identity, and be known to the data
> subject.

Would you support the "compromise" I've mentioned in the past, namely
the creation of a "Legal Contact" role (which could be the ISP,
Technical Contact, the Registrant, or someone else the Registrant
chooses to use) who is held legally responsible for problems
originating from a domain, with accurate info that IS in the WHOIS for
that contact? I think that's all people ultimately need to reach,
someone who is responsible.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 11:28:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] OECD vs ICANN, re: WHOIS accuracy

On Sun, 7 Jul 2002 [email-masked] wrote:

> Somebody clue me in here.  I have run all this Whois stuff through
> several
> that are more technically inclined than I, and I just get laughed at.
>
> The only issues involved in whois is privacy versus IP interests and
> spamming.
> Like Joe says "a few years ago".
> All debates in the technical area of Whois are red herrings.
> Individual rights versus corporations is the only issue.

exactly - in non technical terms whois is a protocol to lookup stuff on
names and numbers.  It runs on port 43.

so if you want info on baptista.god - you would issue the command

whois -h whois.dot-god.com baptista.god

so when you issue that command it sends a query to port 43 at
whois.dot-god.com and a daemon answers - takes the information (query)
baptista.god and provides a response.

You can find the RFC on whois here.

ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc954.txt

you'll notice the RFC is mainly designed to provide directory services for
the US military and friends.  Anyway, apart from the military reasons for
a whois to exist at the time the RFC will provide you wit the technical
specs on whois and how the protocol works - it's simple

 To access the NICNAME/WHOIS server:

      Connect to the SRI-NIC service host at TCP service port 43
      (decimal).

      Send a single "command line", ending with <CRLF> (ASCII CR and
      LF).

      Receive information in response to the command line.  The server
      closes its connection as soon as the output is finished.

the purpose behind whois is to report technical problems. And addressing
information is not relevant to technical problems.  email and backup email
addresses in technical contact records are important, a contact number be
it voicemail or direct connect to live technical person is important, and
a fax would be helpful.  And the domain owner should have the right to not
list any of the above - i.e. no email - no phone - no fax.

if they don't care about being notified of a technical problem then it's
their business to not list any contact details.  This is a right one
should have to protect one's privacy.

in fact the .mil whois these days could use a privacy flag itself.  alot
of the information maintained by the .mil whois could be used to further
the work of terrorists.

we live in an insecure world .. in which privacy in my own opinion is
nothing more then a figment of a deranged imagination.  but it is a
fundamental right and in many countries a legislated right so it is
prudent to allow people options.

And i am very pleased to say that the .god registry is one of the few out
there which actually takes their domain owners rights to privacy
seriously.  They can turn on or turn off the email and organization
displays.

In our earlier registration tests the privacy flag on .god domains was
turned off by default when the domain owner registered.  They had to
specifically turn on the privacy setting when registering.  And the
results were clear that the majority in the population preffered privacy.

http://whaler.tallship.net/archives/god.pccf.net/www/admin/stats-2000-06-01/sld003.htm

Unlike ICANN, The dot.GOD Registry listens to it's users.  The privacy
flags on .god and .satan now default to privacy for all.  If a user does
not want privacy - they can turn the flag off.

And thats what this is all about in the end - the right to be listed or
not.  The whois was never intended as a tool to make the job easier on
lawyers.

regards
joe baptista
www.dot-god.com

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

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #1315
*************************