[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Availability of aggregate repository data
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 17:53:58 -0500
- From: Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>
- Subject: Re: Availability of aggregate repository data
I personally like aggregate contact data. I used to be able to do
"whois VW3" and get a list of domains I was contact for. I can't do
this anymore. You apparently have to contact NSI for this service.
It is nice to be able to keep track of who is listing you as contact.
Vince WOlodkin
Kent Crispin wrote:
>
> On a different subject.
>
> Alex Horns, Robert Frank, and others have made the request that
> aggregate information maintained by the repository or others be made
> available to facilitate fuzzy matches of domain names.
>
> It has been pointed out that there are privacy laws regarding
> database information. These laws are especially strong when it comes
> to giving out aggregate lists with addresses, phone numbers, and the
> like.
>
> Here are examples of the kind of abuse involved: first, advertisers
> may get the list and send unwanted email to all domain name contacts.
> Second, I might be the contact for both "hotbabes.com" and
> "council_of_churches.org", and I might find it embarassing for that
> fact to be widely known.
>
> So there are aruments, legal and otherwise, against making aggregate
> contact data available.
>
> However, aggregate contact data is *not needed* for the purpose
> specified by Alex Horns, Robert Frank, and others. The only
> aggregate data needed is just the list of domain names, so that fuzzy
> matches can be made. Only if a match is found is contact information
> needed.
>
> I understand the need to have the names available in aggregate form,
> but I am concerned about making the contact information available.
> And it may in fact be illegal in some jurisdictions.
>
> Therefore I propose that an ftp-able list of active domain names be
> always available, and that "whois" data only be available through
> direct individual query.
>
> To be more precise, I propose that the MoU direct the above.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited",
> kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke...
> PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F