Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #1577
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST          Friday, February 7 2003          Volume 01 : Number 1577

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 20:15:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Baptista on Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers

FYI - enjoy.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/29185.html

   Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers
   By Joe Baptista
   Posted: 05/02/2003 at 09:47 GMT

   Broken queries are swamping US Internet servers with unnecessary
   traffic. A detailed analysis of 152 million messages received on Oct.
   4, 2002 by one of the root servers in California showed that only 2
   per cent of the queries were legitimate.

   The Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA) at
   the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) which conducted the research
   is trying to understand why the roots get so many broken queries from
   Internet service providers.

   DNS root servers provide a critical service to Internet users by
   mapping text host names to numeric Internet Protocol (IP) addresses.
   The 13 roots are operated by a mix of volunteers and U.S. government
   agencies. The U.S. Department of Commerce is the agency responsible
   for managing the root system which serves most Internet users.

   "If the system were functioning properly, it seems that a single
   source should need to send no more than 1,000 or so queries to a root
   name server in a 24-hour period," said CAIDA researcher Duane Wessels.
   "Yet we see millions of broken queries from certain sources."

   CAIDA researchers speculate that 70 per cent of the bad requests are
   due to misconfigured packet filters, firewalls, or other security
   mechanisms intended to restrict network traffic. Twelve per cent of
   the illegitimate traffic however could not be explained and was for
   nonexistent top-level domains, such as ".elvis", ".corp" and
   "localhost".

   .elvis is alive and well and living in an Alternative Root Universe

   CAIDAs results are no surprise to Bradley Thornton, a root server
   operator at PacificRoot and director of the Top Level Domain
   Association, an organization of domain operators. He operates the
   .corp alternative TLD for the business community.

   The "localhost" queries are to be expected, he says. A computer can
   have many names - but all computers use "localhost" on the Internet as
   the host name of the local loopback interface. "The localhost naming
   convention is an Internet standard and the localhost errors represent
   misconfigured DNS settings at the user or ISP level, he says. The rest
   of the "nonexistent" illegitimate traffic is a vote of confidence in
   the "inclusive namespace" (i.e. alternative TLDs) which Thornton
   helped pioneer.

   "There may only be one Internet," explains Thornton, "but we now have
   many namespaces and thats confusing the legacy root system." Top-level
   domains in the U.S. roots include country codes such as ".uk" for
   England, ".ca" for Canada, or ".us" for the United States, as well as
   generic domains such as ".com", ".net", and ".edu". There are some 300
   top level domains in the US root but inclusive namespace has over
   10,000 listed.

   Thornton thinks that inclusive namespace user activity is the cause of
   much of the rogue traffic. "Anytime one of our users publishes a URL
   from our namespace or any namespace in email or via the web that link
   becomes available to potentially millions of U.S. root users. When
   those users clicks one of our URLs a query is generated."

   This explains the dud traffic discovered by CAIDA, he says. In the
   inclusive namespace universe ".corp" is a busy top level domain and
   Thornton speculates that ".elvis" is alive and well and living in some
   unknown root system heaven.

   According to KC Claffy, a resident research scientist at CAIDA,
   traffic originating from the inclusive namespace system is likely part
   of the results. But Wessels, the project leader, emphasized there was
   not much evidence of alternative (inclusive namespace) TLDs in the
   data collected.

   Thornton disagrees: "the data clearly shows were having an effect." A
   TLD only needs an average of 10,000 hits in the root to show
   significant activity based on the CAIDA data of 3 million legitimate
   queries for 300 listed TLDs, he argues.

   "CAIDA reports that .corp got 51,000 queries and that's very
   significant evidence, he says. ®

   Joe Baptista is involved in the running of dot-god.com, the "official
   domain registry for web addresses ending in .god and .satan".

Joe Baptista - only at www.baptista.god

     Manor Park, East London - UK
                                    http://east-london.england.earth/

- --
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: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:06:16 -0500
From: "L. Gallegos" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Baptista on Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers

Good article :)

On 5 Feb 2003 at 20:15, Joe Baptista wrote:

>  Manor Park, East London - UK
>                                     http://east-london.england.earth/

Cool website, too.  Is he going to develop it further?

Leah

- --
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: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 21:32:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Joe Baptista <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Baptista on Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers

thanks

no idea about http://east-london.england.earth/ - except it's a nice
little site.  So put it in my sig list.

regards
joe

Joe Baptista - only at www.baptista.god

     John de Laet
         a personal and
             professional website
                 http://www.paw.low/

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, L. Gallegos wrote:

> Good article :)
>
> On 5 Feb 2003 at 20:15, Joe Baptista wrote:
>
> >  Manor Park, East London - UK
> >                                     http://east-london.england.earth/
>
> Cool website, too.  Is he going to develop it further?
>
> Leah
>
>
> --
> 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: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:32:54 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] Baptista on Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers

Joe and all former DNSO GA members or other interested parties,

  Thanks Joe for passing this information along.  It seems that the TLDA
have been busy!  Keep up the good works at keeping the pressure up
as needed on ICANN for inclusive root's and new TLD's.

Joe Baptista wrote:

> FYI - enjoy.
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/29185.html
>
>    Dud queries swamp US Internet Root servers
>    By Joe Baptista
>    Posted: 05/02/2003 at 09:47 GMT
>
>    Broken queries are swamping US Internet servers with unnecessary
>    traffic. A detailed analysis of 152 million messages received on Oct.
>    4, 2002 by one of the root servers in California showed that only 2
>    per cent of the queries were legitimate.
>
>    The Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA) at
>    the San Diego Supercomputer Center (SDSC) which conducted the research
>    is trying to understand why the roots get so many broken queries from
>    Internet service providers.
>
>    DNS root servers provide a critical service to Internet users by
>    mapping text host names to numeric Internet Protocol (IP) addresses.
>    The 13 roots are operated by a mix of volunteers and U.S. government
>    agencies. The U.S. Department of Commerce is the agency responsible
>    for managing the root system which serves most Internet users.
>
>    "If the system were functioning properly, it seems that a single
>    source should need to send no more than 1,000 or so queries to a root
>    name server in a 24-hour period," said CAIDA researcher Duane Wessels.
>    "Yet we see millions of broken queries from certain sources."
>
>    CAIDA researchers speculate that 70 per cent of the bad requests are
>    due to misconfigured packet filters, firewalls, or other security
>    mechanisms intended to restrict network traffic. Twelve per cent of
>    the illegitimate traffic however could not be explained and was for
>    nonexistent top-level domains, such as ".elvis", ".corp" and
>    "localhost".
>
>    .elvis is alive and well and living in an Alternative Root Universe
>
>    CAIDAs results are no surprise to Bradley Thornton, a root server
>    operator at PacificRoot and director of the Top Level Domain
>    Association, an organization of domain operators. He operates the
>    .corp alternative TLD for the business community.
>
>    The "localhost" queries are to be expected, he says. A computer can
>    have many names - but all computers use "localhost" on the Internet as
>    the host name of the local loopback interface. "The localhost naming
>    convention is an Internet standard and the localhost errors represent
>    misconfigured DNS settings at the user or ISP level, he says. The rest
>    of the "nonexistent" illegitimate traffic is a vote of confidence in
>    the "inclusive namespace" (i.e. alternative TLDs) which Thornton
>    helped pioneer.
>
>    "There may only be one Internet," explains Thornton, "but we now have
>    many namespaces and thats confusing the legacy root system." Top-level
>    domains in the U.S. roots include country codes such as ".uk" for
>    England, ".ca" for Canada, or ".us" for the United States, as well as
>    generic domains such as ".com", ".net", and ".edu". There are some 300
>    top level domains in the US root but inclusive namespace has over
>    10,000 listed.
>
>    Thornton thinks that inclusive namespace user activity is the cause of
>    much of the rogue traffic. "Anytime one of our users publishes a URL
>    from our namespace or any namespace in email or via the web that link
>    becomes available to potentially millions of U.S. root users. When
>    those users clicks one of our URLs a query is generated."
>
>    This explains the dud traffic discovered by CAIDA, he says. In the
>    inclusive namespace universe ".corp" is a busy top level domain and
>    Thornton speculates that ".elvis" is alive and well and living in some
>    unknown root system heaven.
>
>    According to KC Claffy, a resident research scientist at CAIDA,
>    traffic originating from the inclusive namespace system is likely part
>    of the results. But Wessels, the project leader, emphasized there was
>    not much evidence of alternative (inclusive namespace) TLDs in the
>    data collected.
>
>    Thornton disagrees: "the data clearly shows were having an effect." A
>    TLD only needs an average of 10,000 hits in the root to show
>    significant activity based on the CAIDA data of 3 million legitimate
>    queries for 300 listed TLDs, he argues.
>
>    "CAIDA reports that .corp got 51,000 queries and that's very
>    significant evidence, he says. ®
>
>    Joe Baptista is involved in the running of dot-god.com, the "official
>    domain registry for web addresses ending in .god and .satan".
>
> Joe Baptista - only at www.baptista.god
>
>      Manor Park, East London - UK
>                                     http://east-london.england.earth/
>
> --
> 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 LLA. - (Over 129k members/stakeholders strong!)
================================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:47:16 -0500
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

These are interesting thoughts George, but I really believe that we need
to completely disengage from the current system and its implications and
start again from scratch. This proposal and those in development
elsewhere seem to place an emphasis on fixing the mistakes of whois
rather than creating a system that works.

Let's start the re-engineering with a very basic question. 

Marketers do not need more rights when it comes to my personal data. The
trademark, copyright and patent lobby do not need further rights when it
comes to the protection of their interests. Individuals need a very
basic mechanism that provides marketers and anyone else who wishes to
use this very personal data with a means to ask the individual for
permission to use the data. Once permission has been granted, then the
individual can provide that information to the marketer. 

Full stop. 

Thefore, the basic question is, how do we do this? We can't even begin
to start fixing the problem until we acknowledge that customers have
lsot control of their data. The first step towards a solution lies in
giving that control back.

                       -rwr

"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- - Steven Wright

Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf 
> Of George Kirikos
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 1:39 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I was reading through the latest WHOIS task force updates, at:
> 
http://does-not-exist.net/final-report/final-report-feb03-030201v0.html

and a thought came to mind. Just as there is a "robots.txt" standard for
webcrawlers like Google, how about having a whois.txt standard that
folks can optionally use on their websites?

For those who don't want to put in anything beyond the standard WHOIS
output (i.e. for privacy, or to avoid spam), they can leave a blank
whois.txt on their website or omit it entirely. For those who want
"enhanced" contact details, and want to be easily found, they can
supplement what's already in the standard WHOIS.

For instance, they can provide additional contacts, WHOIS in different
languages, contact info for various countries, etc. This can also assist
in the goal of WHOIS accuracy -- in case the registrant is unable to be
reached from their existing WHOIS info, the registrar can try the info
in their (by default) http://www.example.com/whois.txt

Perhaps someone clever can even think of an XML format or something for
this enhanced WHOIS, to allow standard tools (like other WHOIS servers,
such as www.betterwhois.com or www.uwhois.com, etc.) to parse it. Folks
like Alexa, for example, who already supply contact details at:

http://www.alexa.com/data/details?url=icann.org

(type a different URL, to see if that domain's contact info is correct)
can crawl the web to get the contacts automatically, instead of mining
the WHOIS, optionally for those who want to be found easily.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 21:17:54 +0100 (CET)
From: Marc Schneiders <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

An aspect of whois that, I think, is often neglected, is the sense of
security of 'ownership' that it gives the registrant. The domain name
industry is a fully online business. As a registrant you don't get a piece
of paper to prove that you have some rights in a domain. Registrants will
start asking about that, if there is no public whois to prove who holds
the domain. Of course this problem (if it is one) can be solved by
attaching this feeling of ownership to the password to log in to change
nameservers, and perhaps an optional whois, for those who want their
details in there.

And if it is optional all the accuracy problems we are dealing with
disappear :-)

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 22:06:14 +0100
From: "DNSO SECRETARIAT" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] GNSO WHOIS Task Force Final Report open for comment up to 17 FEB.

[To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]]
[To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]]

The Whois Task Force of the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) has
posted its Final Report on Whois Accuracy and Bulk Access.
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20030206.WhoisTF-accuracy-and-bulkaccess.html

The report contains consensus policy recommendations as well as advice and
comment from the Task Force.

The report will be considered by the GNSO Council at its meeting on 20
February 2003. If the GNSO Council adopts recommendations, they are likely
to be addressed at the ICANN Public Forum on 26 March 2003 in Rio De
Janeiro, Brazil, and to be considered by the ICANN Board for adoption on 27
March 2003.

Comments should be submitted by e-mail to <[email-masked]> no later
than 17 February 2003.

Comments will be archived at:
http://dnso.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments-whois/Arc03/

GNSO Secretariat

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 17:12:12 -0500
From: "Michael D. Palage" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] BULK whois

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_0361_01C2CE02.E3E9C500
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Speaking only on the topic of .info and .biz, it is my understanding of the
contracts that the registries do not have a bulk access per se because it is
the registrars that own the data. Therefore, if one was to purchase Network
Solution's bulk whois data they would  be entitled to all ICANN sanctioned
domain names that it sponsors (.com, .org, .net .info, .biz ,etc), provided
that the registrant did not opt out as provided for in the ICANN Registrar
Accreditation Agreement.

Mike
  -----Original Message-----
  From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
  Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:04 PM
  To: [email-masked]
  Subject: [ga] BULK whois

  Is there a BULK whois file for .info, .biz and .us like there is one for
cno domains?
  And how could one opt-out of this?

  Thanks!
  Simon

- ------=_NextPart_000_0361_01C2CE02.E3E9C500
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Speaking only on the topic of .info and .biz, it is my =
understanding of=20
the contracts that the registries do not have a bulk access per se =
because it is=20
the registrars that own the data. Therefore, if one was to purchase =
Network=20
Solution's bulk whois data they would&nbsp; be entitled to all ICANN =
sanctioned=20
domain names that it sponsors (.com, .org, .net .info, .biz ,etc), =
provided that=20
the registrant did not opt out as provided for in the ICANN Registrar=20
Accreditation Agreement.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Mike</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> [email-masked]=20
  [mailto:[email-masked]]<B>On Behalf Of=20
  </B>[email-masked]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 03, 2003 =
11:04=20
  PM<BR><B>To:</B> [email-masked]<BR><B>Subject:</B> [ga] BULK=20
  whois<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Is there a BULK whois file for .info, =
.biz and=20
  .us like there is one for cno domains? <BR>And how could one opt-out =
of=20
  this?<BR><BR>Thanks!<BR>Simon</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_0361_01C2CE02.E3E9C500--

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 23:11:51 -0000
From: "Richard Henderson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

Excellent points made here by Ross

There is no good reason why all whois data should not be *protected* and
only made available in extreme circumstances through a request process, if
need be backed up by normal legal processes.

The WHOIS is yet another "quasi-law" which abuses consumers' privacy rights.

I've known what it's like to be stalked. It's an insane situation. You start
to dread the phone. You start to dread the doorbell. You have to start doing
crazy things like having pre-prepared safe houses.

I have felt intimidated, registering domain names, knowing full well that my
private life, my address, my phone number, my e-mail is a few clicks from
being accessible to people you really want privacy from. Agreed, you can try
yahoo/hotmail e-mail details. But fake your name, and you risk losing your
domain.

I would be happy for my WHOIS details to be *protected* by a registrar or
some kind of WHOIS 'escrow', providing the data was guarded by clearly
defined procedures.

But I believe that the public exposure of personal details is unwarranted,
could be extremely dangerous to a minority of people, and is unnecessary
because other processes could be implemented instead.

Take a person struggling for political freedom and justice in a corrupt
regime. Think of some of the dangers that good people could be exposed to.

As far as I'm concerned, people do *not* have the right to know my personal
details if I buy a domain name. Instead, they need to know that there are
legitimate processes and mechanisms through which they can pursue me, if I
abuse the use of that domain.

Human beings have a right to privacy and a private family life.

Richard Henderson

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Ross Wm. Rader <[email-masked]>
To: 'George Kirikos' <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 6:47 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

> These are interesting thoughts George, but I really believe that we need
> to completely disengage from the current system and its implications and
> start again from scratch. This proposal and those in development
> elsewhere seem to place an emphasis on fixing the mistakes of whois
> rather than creating a system that works.
>
> Let's start the re-engineering with a very basic question.
>
> Marketers do not need more rights when it comes to my personal data. The
> trademark, copyright and patent lobby do not need further rights when it
> comes to the protection of their interests. Individuals need a very
> basic mechanism that provides marketers and anyone else who wishes to
> use this very personal data with a means to ask the individual for
> permission to use the data. Once permission has been granted, then the
> individual can provide that information to the marketer.
>
> Full stop.
>
> Thefore, the basic question is, how do we do this? We can't even begin
> to start fixing the problem until we acknowledge that customers have
> lsot control of their data. The first step towards a solution lies in
> giving that control back.
>
>
>
>                        -rwr
>
>
>
>
> "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
> idiot."
> - Steven Wright
>
> Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
> > Of George Kirikos
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 1:39 PM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was reading through the latest WHOIS task force updates, at:
> >
> http://does-not-exist.net/final-report/final-report-feb03-030201v0.html
>
> and a thought came to mind. Just as there is a "robots.txt" standard for
> webcrawlers like Google, how about having a whois.txt standard that
> folks can optionally use on their websites?
>
> For those who don't want to put in anything beyond the standard WHOIS
> output (i.e. for privacy, or to avoid spam), they can leave a blank
> whois.txt on their website or omit it entirely. For those who want
> "enhanced" contact details, and want to be easily found, they can
> supplement what's already in the standard WHOIS.
>
> For instance, they can provide additional contacts, WHOIS in different
> languages, contact info for various countries, etc. This can also assist
> in the goal of WHOIS accuracy -- in case the registrant is unable to be
> reached from their existing WHOIS info, the registrar can try the info
> in their (by default) http://www.example.com/whois.txt
>
> Perhaps someone clever can even think of an XML format or something for
> this enhanced WHOIS, to allow standard tools (like other WHOIS servers,
> such as www.betterwhois.com or www.uwhois.com, etc.) to parse it. Folks
> like Alexa, for example, who already supply contact details at:
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details?url=icann.org
>
> (type a different URL, to see if that domain's contact info is correct)
> can crawl the web to get the contacts automatically, instead of mining
> the WHOIS, optionally for those who want to be found easily.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.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
>
>

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 23:14:53 -0000
From: "Richard Henderson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Marc Schneiders <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:17 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] whois.txt, ala robots.txt, as a standard ?

>As a registrant you don't get a piece
> of paper to prove that you have some rights in a domain.

You do in UK.

Nominet sends out a certificate each time you register and each time you
renew. And the .co.uk domains still remain comparatively cheap.

Richard Henderson

- --
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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 23:30:02 -0000
From: "Richard Henderson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] BULK whois (or: ICANN's Agreements)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2CE37.AC5267C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Does the Registrar Accreditation Agreement include sanctions against =
Registrars who break other ICANN Agreements. For example, those =
Registrars who broke Registry-Registrar Agreements in the .info names =
release... they are still accredited... if the industry simply operates =
on a basis of Registrars regulating themselves, what protection is there =
for consumers from bad registrars who put their own self-interest and =
profit before ICANN's Agreements or the interests of consumers?

I don't see the point of ICANN Accreditation if that accreditation is =
based on technical capability, rather than rules of conduct and =
recognition of ICANN Agreements. Technical capability to rip off =
customers? In some cases, sadly, yes.

ICANN is craven >>> it lets bad registrars flout its own rules without =
penalty >>> it throws consumers to the "mercy" of unscrupulous =
registrars >>> the Registrar community itself fails to generate a =
compelling code of conduct on which accreditation and participation =
would be dependent.

Of course, most registrars I encounter are decent people... but their =
reputation is badly damaged by the cowboys in your midst.

The rules of the game for registrars should run simply like this:

You want the privilege and profit of operating in this business? Then =
you have to accept these rules.

You break those rules? You're out.

All Registry-Registrar Agreements should stipulate this, and breach of =
rules should mean... bye bye business.

And ICANN-Registry Agreements should stipulate codes of conduct too, =
with the same rule applying to the Registry...

You, the Registry, fail to enforce your rules? You're out too.

Contract. Sign.

Richard Henderson

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Michael D. Palage=20
  To: [email-masked] ; [email-masked]=20
  Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:12 PM
  Subject: RE: [ga] BULK whois

  Speaking only on the topic of .info and .biz, it is my understanding =
of the contracts that the registries do not have a bulk access per se =
because it is the registrars that own the data. Therefore, if one was to =
purchase Network Solution's bulk whois data they would  be entitled to =
all ICANN sanctioned domain names that it sponsors (.com, .org, .net =
.info, .biz ,etc), provided that the registrant did not opt out as =
provided for in the ICANN Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
  =20
  Mike
    -----Original Message-----
    From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of =
[email-masked]
    Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:04 PM
    To: [email-masked]
    Subject: [ga] BULK whois

    Is there a BULK whois file for .info, .biz and .us like there is one =
for cno domains?=20
    And how could one opt-out of this?

    Thanks!
    Simon

- ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2CE37.AC5267C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Does the Registrar Accreditation =
Agreement include=20
sanctions&nbsp;against Registrars who break other ICANN Agreements. For =
example,=20
those Registrars who broke Registry-Registrar Agreements in the .info =
names=20
release... they are still accredited... if the industry simply operates =
on a=20
basis of Registrars regulating themselves, what protection is there for=20
consumers from bad registrars who put their own self-interest and profit =
before=20
ICANN's Agreements or the interests of consumers?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I don't see the point of ICANN =
Accreditation if=20
that accreditation is based&nbsp;on technical capability, rather than =
rules of=20
conduct and recognition of ICANN Agreements. Technical capability to rip =
off=20
customers? In some cases, sadly, yes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>ICANN is craven &gt;&gt;&gt; it lets =
bad registrars=20
flout its own rules without penalty &gt;&gt;&gt; it throws consumers to =
the=20
"mercy" of unscrupulous registrars &gt;&gt;&gt; the Registrar community =
itself=20
fails to generate a compelling code of conduct on which accreditation =
and=20
participation would be dependent.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Of course, most registrars I encounter =
are decent=20
people... but their reputation is badly damaged by the cowboys in your=20
midst.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The rules of the game for registrars =
should run=20
simply like this:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You want the privilege and profit of =
operating in=20
this business? Then you have to accept these rules.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You break those rules? You're =
out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>All Registry-Registrar Agreements =
should stipulate=20
this, and breach of rules should mean... bye bye business.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>And ICANN-Registry Agreements should =
stipulate=20
codes of conduct too, with the same rule applying to the=20
Registry...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You, the Registry, fail to enforce your =
rules?=20
You're out too.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Contract. Sign.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Richard Henderson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]" =
title=[email-masked]>Michael D.=20
  Palage</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]"=20
  title=[email-masked]>[email-masked]</A> ; <A=20
  href=3D"mailto:[email-masked]" title=[email-masked]>[email-masked]</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, February 06, =
2003 10:12=20
  PM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [ga] BULK =
whois</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT color=3D#0000ff =
face=3DArial=20
  size=3D2>Speaking only on the topic of .info and .biz, it is my =
understanding of=20
  the contracts that the registries do not have a bulk access per se =
because it=20
  is the registrars that own the data. Therefore, if one was to purchase =
Network=20
  Solution's bulk whois data they would&nbsp; be entitled to all ICANN=20
  sanctioned domain names that it sponsors (.com, .org, .net .info, .biz =
,etc),=20
  provided that the registrant did not opt out as provided for in the =
ICANN=20
  Registrar Accreditation Agreement.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT color=3D#0000ff =
face=3DArial=20
  size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D600370722-06022003><FONT color=3D#0000ff =
face=3DArial=20
  size=3D2>Mike</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
  style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
    <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
    size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
[email-masked]=20
    [mailto:[email-masked]]<B>On Behalf Of=20
    </B>[email-masked]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 03, 2003 =
11:04=20
    PM<BR><B>To:</B> [email-masked]<BR><B>Subject:</B> [ga] BULK=20
    whois<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Is there a BULK whois file for =
.info, .biz and=20
    .us like there is one for cno domains? <BR>And how could one opt-out =
of=20
    =
this?<BR><BR>Thanks!<BR>Simon</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BOD=
Y></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2CE37.AC5267C0--

- --
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 #1577
*************************