I am interested to know why the UK has done a backflip. If this has happened
what problems have they encountered ! In fact I am so interested I will send
an email to their support and I will post my results on this list.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ginger Fish" <ginger-fish&#167;scifi-art.com>
To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:31 AM
Subject: RE: [DNS] Comments on draft whois policy


>
> Rod "Registry" Keys, I can assure you no one is speculating.../ but why is
> it so important
> to you that full .com.au registrant data remains publicly accessible ?
It's
> NOT as though you would need the avenue to access your OWN client contact
> details..
>
> Ginger
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rod Keys [mailto:rod&#167;ddns.com.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:21 AM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Comments on draft whois policy
>
>
> Jon,
> This change has not been confirmed by nominet perhaps auDA could confirm
> this with nominet as a matter of urgency. I agree with you sentiments Jon.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Lawrence" <jon&#167;jonlawrence.com>
> To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 6:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Comments on draft whois policy
>
>
> > Note that the whois service that Nominet (.uk registry) provides
currently
> > only lists the following information:
> > Domain Name
> > Registrant Name
> > Registrar/Reseller Name
> > Registration Date
> > Name Servers
> >
> > For various reasons this has proven very problematic and Nominet has now
> > begun a process to begin publishing registrant data on the whois.
> >
> > There may be some lessons for auDA to learn from Nominet on this issue,
> > especially as the UK's data protection laws have been more stringent
than
> > the recently implemented privacy laws in Australia for some time.
> >
> > rgds
> > jon
> >
> >
> >
> > >-- Original Message --
> > >Reply-To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> > >Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:31:51 +1000 (EST)
> > >From: Ian Smith <smithi&#167;nimnet.asn.au>
> > >To: Rod Keys <rod&#167;ddns.com.au>
> > >cc: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au, Mark Hughes
> <effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au>,
> > >        Jo Lim <jo.lim&#167;auda.org.au>
> > >Subject: Re: [DNS] Comments on draft whois policy
> > >
> > >
> > >On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Rod Keys wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Mark & Ian
> > >
> > >I'm sure Mark will do a better job, but ..
> > >
> > > > Whilst I appricate your comments picture this scene. I have
purchased
> > >some
> > > > goods on line and several days later they have not arrived. I try to
> > ring
> > > > them but alas no answer or worse still the phone is disconnected.
> Their
> > >web
> > > > site lists their mailing address is a PO Box. What fall back as a
> consumer
> > > > do I have? however if the address details are available where they
> cannot
> > >be
> > > > hidden I at least have some redress and this has happened to me. I
was
> > >able
> > > > to go to the police and they followed it up and guesswhat I got my
> money
> > > > back.
> > >
> > >As seemed pretty clear from Mark's post, there's no impediment to law
> > >enforcement bodies obtaining full database information as/when
required;
> > >I expect that this would apply to consumer protection authorities also.
> > >
> > >I feel any inconvenience a few people may suffer in not getting
'instant
> > >results' from whois queries would be more than outweighed by inhibiting
> > >unconscionable practices of some registrars or other would-be
> s[pc]ammers.
> > >
> > >Cheers, Ian
> > >
> > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Ian Smith" <smithi&#167;nimnet.asn.au>
> > > > To: "Mark Hughes" <effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au>
> > > > Cc: "Jo Lim" <jo.lim&#167;auda.org.au>; "Dns Discussion Listserver"
> > > > <dns&#167;auda.org.au>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 5:18 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [DNS] Comments on draft whois policy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Mark Hughes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > >  > As there are clear benefits but no identifiable downside, I
> strongly
> > > > support
> > > > >  > removing "Registrant Street" from the publicly visible whois
> data.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well made arguments Mark; smells good to me (fwiw!)
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers, Ian
> > >
> > >[snip]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
> > >Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
> > >
> > >author, further information at the above URL.  (307 subscribers.)
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
> > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> > author, further information at the above URL.  (309 subscribers.)
> >
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> author, further information at the above URL.  (310 subscribers.)
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
> author, further information at the above URL.  (309 subscribers.)
>
>