Chris, 1) This is handled by RFC-1876 (in DNS, not Whois)
2) Nice, but not strictly required. 3) This is a violation of the ToS on every WHOIS I've seen (unless you actually BUY the data, which is a different discussion) 4) Not currently possible in most WHOIS servers (I remember when it was), but would you automate this? 5) I'm not sure what LEGITIMATE reason one would have for monitoring any but their own whois -- and no one else should be able to access this. For our domains, they either can't be modified, or I don't care. -- Lynn On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:11:37 -0500 (EST), Christopher Hicks wrote: >On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Lynn W. Taylor wrote: >>�I have one question, and maybe I'm missing something: >>�Why does the WHOIS result need to be easily machine-parsed? >>�Without ransacking the database, how would we use this? > >(1) visual traceroute > >(2) populating a database with data from an existing domain to allow a >user to correct and augment the information when setting up their new >customer profile with us. �The contact and name server information are >both vital parts of this process in my experience. > >(3) finding local businesses > >(4) determining what other domains a given person owns. �This would be >valiable from an OpenSRS reseller perspective as well as for law >enforcement and anti-spam efforts. > >(5) Monitoring whois over time to see what changes. �This has become much >harder with all of the obfuscation various people do. �It used to be that >I could say when a given piece of data changed in whois, but now figuring >that out requires parsing the morphing record to pull out the individual >data points and comparing them individually. �Given that the obfuscation >doesn't slow the spammers down noticably, but it does make people who want >to do interesting and worthwhile things with the data give up or spend >inordinate amounts of time working around the foolish obfuscation it makes >me want to scream! �(Must go kill rollerrats...die! die!...grrr!!!) > >Obviously I'm a bit pieved at all of this short-sighted obfuscation, but >it has made the legitimate uses we have much more painful. �We've lost >business because we won't let people setup domains anonymously. �Aside >from the fact that I don't like that idea inherently and I hope I wouldn't >let people do it even if the rules said it was OK, the motivations of >those who want to be anonymous are highly affected by what happens within >days of someone showing up in whois.
