Subject: [weirds] ICANN News Alert -- Explore the Draft Next Generation gTLD Directory Services Model

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 25 Jun 2013 00:11:41 -0400

An ICANN working group recommends replacing WHOIS with a giant centralized 
database of registrant contact information.

Scott Hollenbeck was one of the group members; I realize the group isn't done 
so there's doubtless confidentiality issues but perhaps he can give some 
pointers to where to look for more info beyond the draft report linked below.

R's,
John
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 22:47:17
From: ICANN At-Large Staff <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- Explore the Draft Next Generation
     gTLD Directory Services Model

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24jun13-en.htm

________________________________
Explore the Draft Next Generation gTLD Directory Services Model

24 June 2013

ICANN has embarked on an effort to reinvent today's WHOIS system. Be part of 
the solution and join the discussion...online and at ICANN's Durban meeting.

<http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/ards-model-950x600-24jun13-en.png>

As the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG), we have proposed 
a paradigm shift – a new system in which gTLD registration data is collected, 
validated and disclosed for permissible purposes only, with some data elements 
being accessible only to authenticated requestors that are then held 
accountable for appropriate use. Our objective is to reexamine and define the 
purpose of collecting and maintaining gTLD directory data, consider how to 
safeguard the data, and propose a next generation solution that will better 
serve the needs of the global Internet community.

In our Initial 
Report<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf> 
[PDF, 1.7 MB], we identify the design features and principles that we think are 
essential in this new system, and a proposed Model for the next generation data 
directory services to replace WHOIS.

Help shape this paradigm shift by sharing your reaction to our 
recommendations<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf> 
[PDF, 1.7 MB] and answering the questions linked below (click on "Share Your 
Thoughts"). Did we meet our objective? Do the recommendations address your 
concerns? How can we make them better?

Share Your 
Thoughts<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/share-24jun13-en.htm>

There are different ways to share your perspective with us:

  *   A 
webinar<http://www.icann.org/en/about/learning/webinars/gtld-directory-services-24jun13-en.htm> 
on Monday, 8 July at 15:00-16:30 UTC: we will walk you through our proposal and 
invite you to share your views and input.
  *   A consultation in Durban<http://durban47.icann.org/node/39627> on Monday, 
15 July: we will present the outcome of our work and open the floor for any 
questions or feedback you may have. A recording of the session will be made 
available shortly after the meeting;
  *   Submit comments by email: 
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>.

All input received by August 12 will be carefully considered as we finalize our 
recommendations and bring our work to a conclusion. To help focus your 
attention, we request your feedback on a set of questions, although you are 
free to comment on any aspect of the Initial Report.

Sincerely,

Members of the Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services 
(EWG)<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services>

More Information

Our work stems from the Board's 
directive<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-08nov12-en.htm> 
to redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data, while 
balancing data accuracy and access issues with safeguards for protecting data. 
We considered the important community work done over the last decade by the 
GNSO, the SSAC, the WHOIS Review Team, the GAC and others. Our Initial 
Report<http://www.icann.org/en/groups/other/gtld-directory-services/initial-report-24jun13-en.pdf> 
[PDF, 1.7 MB] reflects our consensus view of the design principles and features 
needed for a new system. Our proposed Model highlights how these design 
principles and features could be fulfilled in the ICANN domain ecosystem.

What's Next?

We will consider your input and present a final report containing our 
recommended design principles, features, and suggested Model to ICANN's CEO and 
Board when our work is concluded. This output will feed into a Board-initiated 
GNSO policy development process to serve as a foundation for the GNSO's 
creation of new consensus policy, and contractual negotiations, as appropriate.

---

From: Francisco Obispo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:13:09 -0700

It kind of surprised me as well, specially since we've been all busy working on WEIRDs and it seems like a different approach?

On Jun 24, 2013, at 9:11 PM, John R Levine <[email-masked]> wrote:

> An ICANN working group recommends replacing WHOIS with a giant centralized database of registrant contact information.
> 
> Scott Hollenbeck was one of the group members; I realize the group isn't done so there's doubtless confidentiality issues but perhaps he can give some pointers to where to look for more info beyond the draft report linked below.
> 
> R's,
> John

Francisco Obispo 
Director of Applications and Services - ISC
email: [email-masked]
Phone: +1 650 423 1374 || INOC-DBA *3557* NOC
PGP KeyID = B38DB1BE

---

From: "John R Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 25 Jun 2013 00:24:56 -0400

> It kind of surprised me as well, specially since we've been all busy 
> working on WEIRDs and it seems like a different approach?

Well, do remember that the original plan was for WEIRDS to deal with 
number data, and the names part was added to mollify a mob of people 
demanding that we handle names, most of whom (with you and Scott as 
notable exceptions) promptly disappeared.

It seems to me that WEIRDS-name is as good an approach as any to query 
whatever the EWG comes up with, give or take what goes where in its tiered 
access model.  It also seems unlikely that this will affect ccTLDs who are 
much more likely to hold onto their own data and provide their own WEIRDS 
servers.

And if history is any guide, it will be a very long time if ever before 
the EWG's report is accepted and implemented, so in the intervening decade 
it would be nice to have a better way to query the existing registries for 
the existing crud.

R's,
John

---

From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:11:15 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of John R Levine
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:12 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [weirds] ICANN News Alert -- Explore the Draft Next Generation

There's nothing else that's available to the general public.

This ICANN effort does not in any way conflict with or contradict our work in WEIRDS. Note that the preliminary report doesn't say anything about the access protocol, but it could very well be RDAP.

As noted in another reply to this thread, whatever action is taken with respect to the report is years away. If RDAP gets traction there's no reason it can't be used. I can't tell you how many times I explained to the group how RDAP could (or couldn't) support the recommendations we were debating.

Scott

---

From: Dave Piscitello <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 05:09:27 -0700

+1

I think weirds would be an essential component of this proposed solution. I also suggest you speak with Rod Rasmussen for addl info

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 25, 2013, at 7:12 AM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> weirds mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds

---

From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:37:17 +0000

Dave / John et al

I'm also on the group with Scott and Rod

We're not tasked with getting into the specifics of how this would all work ie. access protocols etc.,

So there's no obvious reason why WEIRDS'  cannot be used

Regards

Michele

>> As noted in another reply to this thread, whatever action is taken with respect to the report is years away. If RDAP gets traction there's no reason it can't be used. I can't tell you how many tim…

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions ♞
Hosting & Domains
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.co
http://blog.blacknight.com/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612 
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Facebook: http://fb.me/blacknight
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845