David, On Jan 13, 2025, at 9:38 AM, David Farmer via SIG-policy <[email protected]> wrote: > However, I strongly object to the complete removal of postal contact > information from Bulk Whois. This would significantly degrade the usefulness > of this information for Internet Research purposes, one of the explicitly > permitted uses of Bulk Whois. Withholding the street name and number could be > reasonable for privacy protection; however, most postal contact information > should remain in Bulk Whois for statistical correlation, including the city, > state, province, county, and postal codes.
Long (long) ago, due to the significant variance of how various countries represented postal addresses (including the scripts those addresses were written in), APNIC made the decision that the address: tag in the Whois record was to be treated as essentially opaque, being intended to be used, e.g., as something to be copied verbatim onto a snail mail address label. The only part of the address explicitly broken out is the country: tag. As such, I’m not sure any statistical analysis of city, state/province, and/or postal code would hold much water. I’m also not sure how much value it would bring to even those who do “Internet Research” (whatever that means). This may have changed in the eons since I left APNIC — a quick search (i.e., a single google search :)) didn’t turn up a schema so I can’t confirm. Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
