DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [nc-impwhois] Starting point for WHOIS implementation discussions

On 2003-01-14 07:59:03 -0800, Rick Wesson wrote:

> I continue to believe that a registrant acknologement is all that
> would be required -- I don't understand how you come to the
> conclusion you did, please elaborate as the definitions provided
> are only to add clarity to the discussion.

>      VERIFIED  - The registrant has acknowledged that the information is
>                  true and correct.

>      VALIDATED - VERIFIED by a 3rd party that the data is syntactically
>                  and semanticly ACCURATE.

>      ACCURATE  - Free from error, conforming to local, geographical and
>                  political postal addressing, international PSTN dialing
>                  and RFC2822 standards.

Is it possible that the this discussion is based on some confusion
around the notion of a "3rd party" in the definition of "VALIDATED"?
I.e., is this supposed to mean "party different from registrant" or
"different from registrar"?

Thomas Roessler				<roessler@does-not-exist.org>

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>