At 10:41 AM 5/13/02 -0400, Derek J. Balling wrote: >At 9:16 AM -0400 5/13/02, Scott Allan wrote: >>Everyone should promote good WHOIS info (and explain why; and the >>consequences for not doing so). As far as your (and our) obligations to >>police the data, it is not expected that you pro-actively test or check >>the data and submit reports to us. >> >>We have an obligation to act on challenges as they arise, but we do not >>have to seek out bad data independently. > >If you were provided, say, weekly, with a list of domains which had bad >whois info, would that be sufficient? > >That's something I could probably have the RFCI databases kick out on a >regular basis to a predefined e-mail address. > >I'm more than willing to do that. In fact, it's absolutely no trouble, >that is to say, "I think I'm going to start doing that, and sending them >to <compliance@> unless you give me a better place to send them, and if >you have a preferred format you'd like the output in, please let me know >so that I make whoever receives these messages jobs easier." ;-)
Ha! Invalid WHOIS contact info reports should be directed to compliance as you note - I think they would prefer one domain per message - but you can ask them directly as well. :) sA
