[Ietf-not43] ICANN WHOIS TF report

[Andrew Newton]

Eric,

I went through the survey report and did not come to any conclusions 
that what they want is as you have described.  I think you are looking 
to hard at the details and need to elevate yourself a few thousand feet.

-andy


On Saturday, June 29, 2002, at 11:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote:

>
> on 6/28/2002 1:31 PM Ted Hardie wrote:
>
>> The current version of the Whois TF document does not yet seem to be at
>> the DNSO website, but there is a link at:
>>
>> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-whois/Arc00/msg00462.html
>
> Do we need to have a liason with the TF? They are recommending specific
> implementation features which are at odds with our efforts, although the
> final goals are compatible.
>
> Specifically, they are recommending a monolithic free-form search 
> system,
> while we are pursuing a distributed model which uses keyed lookups. Our
> model can support free-form searches if one or more catalog servers are
> provided by licensed third-parties, which would suit their requirements
> and would dovetail with their "market" solution. Note that catalog 
> servers
> can be made to comply with restrictions in order to gain bulk access to
> per-registry repositories. Plus the use of catlog servers means that
> access levels can be negotiated on a per-jurisdiction basis, such that a
> registry in ~Sweden could provide the catalog engines with different
> information than a registry in ~America.
>
> So while the approaches are different, ours can work for their needs,
> although I'm wondering if somebody needs to communicate this?
>
> --
> Eric A. Hall                                        
> http://www.ehsco.com/
> Internet Core Protocols          
> http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-not43 mailing list
> Ietf-not43@lists.verisignlabs.com
> http://lists.verisignlabs.com/mailman/listinfo/ietf-not43