Interesting WHOIS strategy (1.Viewing)
- Topic Starter RedRider
- Start date
- Replies: Replies 3
- Views: Views 82
rlm
Bonfire.ca
I suppose each registry has their own policy for whois data. Although I believe that CIRA states that only real people are valid as contacts (i.e. roles such as Domain Admin are not allowed), we all know CIRA is not proactive in ensuring rules are followed. However, a complainant could request CIRA to follow up on it, at which time CIRA would probably only ask the user to correct it. If they refused to, then CIRA would have to decide if they're actually going to do anything about it, and if so, what. In response to such a request, most registrants would probably just turn on privacy and thus eliminate the problem and the complainant basically has no satisfaction or recourse. Thus its a pointless exercise... And a meaningless rule. Our registrar contacts here such as 
@FM and 
@bmetal would probably have the best insight into this.
@FM and @bmetal would probably have the best insight into this.
You've hit all the core points 
@rlm . I haven't seen CIRA do a RIV in a a long time (registrant information validation). There used to be some rules in the registry about banned names, but that might have been before the last (fury) rewrite. Registrant can be a legal entity, but yes, Admin contacts are supposed to be real people, despite that fact that at least for e-mail, "role" addresses work better (less likely to become out of date) ... but that's rarely an issue for most folks here (domainers).
@rlm . I haven't seen CIRA do a RIV in a a long time (registrant information validation). There used to be some rules in the registry about banned names, but that might have been before the last (fury) rewrite. Registrant can be a legal entity, but yes, Admin contacts are supposed to be real people, despite that fact that at least for e-mail, "role" addresses work better (less likely to become out of date) ... but that's rarely an issue for most folks here (domainers).
So I've seen RIVs recently, but the strategy you describe could indeed play out like this - the registrant would have to correct the data and then turn on whois privacy - or at least I wouldn't see any thing that would prevent them from doing so.I suppose each registry has their own policy for whois data. Although I believe that CIRA states that only real people are valid as contacts (i.e. roles such as Domain Admin are not allowed), we all know CIRA is not proactive in ensuring rules are followed. However, a complainant could request CIRA to follow up on it, at which time CIRA would probably only ask the user to correct it. If they refused to, then CIRA would have to decide if they're actually going to do anything about it, and if so, what. In response to such a request, most registrants would probably just turn on privacy and thus eliminate the problem and the complainant basically has no satisfaction or recourse. Thus its a pointless exercise... And a meaningless rule. Our registrar contacts here such as
Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |