Wish Dr Lisse took such a strong position with regards to the letter
of the RFC when it came to RFC1591.......
On Fri, 7 May 1999 10:09:25 +0200 (South Africa Standard Time), Dr
Eberhard W Lisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Karl,
>
>On Thu, 6 May 1999, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
>> The whois database is part and parcel, a necessary element of DNS
>> operation. It is impossible (or at least unreasonable) to conceive of
>> running a TLD zone file without keeping track of who is associated with
>> each second level domain.
>
>Actually, that's incorrect. The DNS SOA record shows who produced the
>record and according to the RFC's the postmaster@... address is mandatory.
>There is just no technical *NEED* to have more data.
>
>In fact .NA does not give out this information for its registrants and
>that has been working for almost 8 years.
>
>> The two parts - zone file and whois/contact database have always been
>> two parts of a whole. The whois/contact database is useful in and of
>> itself, but the zone file starts to disintegrate and becomes rapidly
>> worthless without the whois/contact database -- without the contact
>> database it is impossible to validate updates, or even to collect fees.
>
>That's opinion, not fact. You actually strengthen NSI's argument, if you
>look at it closely: They were hired to produce the ZONES without which the
>Internet doesn't work.
>
>They ALSO produced, the WHOIS data base. As far as I am concerned, this is
>their intellectual property and they have all the rights in the world to
>market it
>
>
>> Indeed, the fact that NSF approved fees contains an implicit statement
>> that there is a contact database upon which the contractor, NSI, can
>> administer to process renewals.
>
>Yes, and? Does it say this must be handed over?
>
>
>> The whois database is about as ancillary to DNS as wings are ancillary to
>> a flying airplane.
>
>Nonsense!
>
>
>
>el
--
William X. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
