Roeland and all,
My My hasn't this thread gotten allot of attention!! >;) And no small wonder
either! I personally find it both interesting and amusing that so much
attention on how the Whois should be managed is so overwhelmingly
of so much concern to so many on this list.
In attempt to bring some levity and common sense to this thread lets
look at some facts.
1.)The Whois database and app interface is the property of NSI.
2.) Access or levels of access is strictly NSI's decision as they own it
( See #1 ).
3.) Restricting access will NOT work regardless of how it is approached.
a.) The why's and wherefores are well known and not worth Mb's
of discussion to anyone.
PERSONAL OPINION:
If NSI wants to restrict access to the Whois database they should do so
based on who their DIRECT customers are or whom is a stock holder
in NSI stock. However I believe that much good will would be lost
to NSI should the restrict access to the Whois database at all.
If NSI is using considering restriction to the Whois Database as a
vehicle to reduce or eliminate spamm, it is a poor and unfair approach
to the Internet Stakeholder. There are many other approaches that are
much more effective, if used in concert, than restricting or eliminating
access to the Whois Database. Yes, these methods are no doubt,
more expensive. But you get what you pay for for the most part
in this world.
Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> At 10:12 PM 12/30/98 -0500, Dan Steinberg wrote:
> >"Roeland M.J. Meyer" wrote:
> >> Okay, you have your point, However, to what purpose? I have conceded
> >> already that not all the NIC contacts fulfill the definition. What I was
> >> getting at was that the NIC contacts are sufficiently broad-based such that
> >> restricting detailed whois lookup to that audience shouldn't leave many
> >> out. It would be a substantial improvement over current state of affairs.
> >> Yes, you would be included in such a broad-brush swep. More importantly, it
> >> wouldn't inadvertantly exclude those who legitimately need whois access.
> >> Maybe I shouldn't use the term "network operator"?
> >
> >OK. It won't leave many out but look who gets left in. Consider
> >this. If anyone with a NIC handle gets detailed whois access, then
> >anyone who wants to harvest the database has a simple entry. Domain
> >contacts get NIC handles, so all they have to do is buy a domain or
> >register a new one. That's a pretty low entry barrier for spammers
> >I'm afraid.
>
> Hmmm, so now we have come close to the boundary, as this is indeed a
> boundry problem. Would you say that those who have NIC handles include all
> those who legitimately need ready accesss to whois? If this is the case
> than we can consider parsing it further? Also, requireing a working domain,
> if NSI would do their job here, is a lot steeper than $70US entry fee.
> Don't forget that they actually need to run the domain, or pay someone else
> to. From a spammers perspective, paying someone else leaves an additional
> vulnerability.
>
> Spammers are not my principle worry here. Spammers are light-weight
> compared to some of the real fruit-cakes out there, many of whom do not
> have a domain. Spammers are a special case. But, they are for the most part
> harmless. They are a nuisance, but physically harmless. Joe Psycho
> Extortionist isn't going to set up a DNS just to get to the whois database.
>
> ___________________________________________________
> Roeland M.J. Meyer -
> e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
> Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
> Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
> ___________________________________________________
> I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing...
> -- Thomas Jefferson
>
> --
> DOMAIN-POLICY administrivia should be sent to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To unsubscribe send a message with only one line "SIGNOFF DOMAIN-POLICY"
> For more help regarding Listserv commands send the one line "HELP"
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
