[Ietf-not43] IRIS Open Issues

[Andrew Newton]

I hear you, but I think the apprehension is that not much is really 
known about requirements for such a feature, especially when it appears 
that nobody does this today.  That's not to say it won't be done, but 
perhaps a feature for version 2 when more deployment experience is 
available.

I'd like to point out that the current dreg spec does support this in 
the "classic" sense.  That is, there is explicit support for domain 
handles.  If a registry/registrar desired, they could point to instances 
of a domain-in-time with a domain handle in the seeAlso section of a 
domain looked up by domain name.

-andy

Paul Stahura wrote:
> I agree, eNom does not make that info available
> (over port-43) either at this time (but has via other channels to law
> enforcement for example).
> 
> Alls I'm saying is that I can see: 
> 1) how it would be a good idea to have functionality already 
> built-in to the spec which allowed someone to look
> up the whois history (or other information) on a domain (or an IP address
> too).
> 2) why such a policy (requiring the storage and disclosure of the info)
> would be beneficial to law enforcement for example.
> 
> If it is left out wouldn't it constrain the policy makers to
> not be able to make that policy?
> 
> Also, lets say there is no policy made by the policy makers.
> What if a group of thin-registry-registrars/registries wanted to provide a
> "domain title search" product for a fee (lets assume the've kept the info
> over the years)?  
> To enable them to do so, would then CRISP have to be modified at that time?
> Or would they have to come up with an entirely different mechanism?
> Why not stick it in now?
> 
> No biggie, just wondering.
> Paul