I know this is coming late, i.e. after the Council meeting today
in Marrakesh, but just to provide you with some background on
Bruce's thinking.

--- Bruce Tonkin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Subject: [council] Options for WHOIS purpose
> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 04:55:40 +1000
> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: "Council GNSO" <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> In light of the extensive feedback we have received this week,
> I believe
> we have the following options:
> 
> (1) Revise definition of purpose
> 
> (2) Keep current definition, but expand on what that
> definition means
> 
> (3) Leave definition as is for now, until the task force
> completes its
> work on recommending any changes to WHOIS (e.g changes to what
> is made
> public, and how data that is not public can be accessed by
> legitimate
> users).  Then re-evaluate the definition.
> 
> 
> Lets discuss this further in the Council meeting tomorrow.
> 
> In any case, I recommend that the task force continue its
> current work
> program.  Any work on purpose should be done at the Council
> level.
> 
> Note that in cases where the task force decides to remove
> certain data
> elements from public access, the mechanism to access those
> elements may
> or may not be called part of the WHOIS service in future, and
> may or may
> not use the current port-43 protocol.  E.g We may end up with
> a revised
> "WHOIS service", and a separate "Dealing with bad people"
> service, or
> maybe a "Standard WHOIS service" and "Advanced WHOIS service".
>   Rather
> than worrying about what it is called for now, or worrying
> about the
> technical protocols, lets focus on the functional aspects.
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> 
> 
>