> > Yes spammers will in the end get email addresses. But I firmly > > believe there is more than enough intelectual horsepower among the > > internet community to come up with a way to make whois mining > > intractable ..... > > Maybe: > - for "anonymous" users, limit the number of WHOIS requests to a very > small number / IP / day, and change e-mail addresses to ****@domain > - for "trusted" users (well, it is hard to define this... maybe this > one is not needed at all), limit the number of WHOIS requests from > the same user/day, and include e-mail addresses in the response
Make it a registry command, each registrar can query the registry for the administrative and technical contact information. The registry will then query the registrar of record, and if the registrar fails to provide a response they are billed $100 and the original registry is notified to try again ASAP. After that, if GoDaddy doesn't want to return email addresses, it's their own call. At $100 per bogus answer, I bet they'll decide they'd rather lose the domain then pay $100 every few seconds. What will be done with the money? I'm thinking third world countries, local charities, whatever. Nobody profits, this is just designed to be an asskicking for those that don't play by the rules. Exceptions will be made for scheduled system outages, within a reasonable SLA. Exceptions will also be made for honest accidental outages, but again, within a reasonable SLA. You can't be down 23 hours and 59 minutes per day every day, or for any excessive period of time. Lastly, I'd like to see a cost imposed on the registrar if they choose to DAK a transfer unless they have disabled the domain IN ADVANCE. By disabled the domain, I'm talking a full lock, NS dropped from the roots and everything. This is intended to prevent a registrar like NetSol from denying transfers left right and center on their own. In order for this to work, there would have to be some way for the end user to DAK without the registrar incurring a fee, this would get a bit more complex in a thin registry, but could be workable. -- I used to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure.
