Re: Thick vs.thin (was: [ga] Casting stones)

[William X Walsh <william@wxsoft.info>]

Thursday, August 08, 2002, 3:05:06 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> Makes it easier for them to cover their tracks, Stephane.  Makes it
>> that much easier for them to hide from the consequences of their
>> actions.

> Yes, that's what I thought, you do not understand the difference
> between privacy and secrecy. So let me explain.  

> Privacy does not mean I advocate completely hiding the social
> information by shutting down the whois server.

> Privacy means that *some* limits (which have to be defined) are set to
> the (mis)use of personal data. For instance, in France, transferring
> (in bulk, not in detail) personal data to a country without sufficient
> protection, such as the USA, is illegal. Unlike what even many French
> believe, it is not forbidden to have a public whois, just that *some*
> things are regulated (the registry may go further and add other
> protections for its customers).

So let me ask the question POINT BLANK.  What information will be
available?

Will a public whois service, as defined by RFCs, with address and
contact information for domain registrants, be available by the future
eu registry?

Because you seem to be wanting to twist this into some debate over
something else entirely.  The fact is that if their information will
not be available in the public whois, then I stand by what I said as
accurate, and state that your response does not address, in any
fashion, the issues I raised.

>> Some antispam services automatically block all domains under TLDs
>> which do not have a public whois server available that provides full
>> contact information, for this very reason.

> Pure bluff. This would suppress mail for most African and
> Latin-American countries (which typically do not have a whois for
> practical reasons) but would allow .COM (whose database is public but,
> for this very reason, highly unreliable) to spam everyone. BS.

Pure bluff?

Where have you been Stephane?  This blackhole service already exists
today, and is already blocking all domains under TLDs that do not
operate public whois servers providing domain contact information.

The qualification for listing them is here:
If a TLD does not have a working, public, free of charge WHOIS
registry working and providing all the necessary contact information,
then by definition no domain in that TLD is RFC954-compliant, and that
would make the entire TLD a viable candidate for listing.

http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-whois.html

I don't advocate use of this blacklist service, myself, but I do know
that its use is on the increase, as the spam issue becomes more and
more an issue for individual users, ISPs are responding with more
rigid rules for accepting email from particular servers, domains, and
yes, even TLDs.

You might think that this is bluff, but I don't see how you can
possibly say that when it is in fact in place and being used today, by
a growing number of ISPs and networks.

-- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <william@wxsoft.info>
--
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!
http://www.saveinternetradio.org/

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html