Re: IETF-51 WhoisFix BoF Announcement

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jaap Akkerhuis" <[email protected]>
To: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: IETF-51 WhoisFix BoF Announcement


>
>
>     ...which is completely domain/registry/registrar specific. Completely
fine
>     by me, but the results are most certainly going to be skewed
>     towards one particular application. AFAIK, no attempt whatsoever
>     has been made within this survey to attempt to take into account
>     non-domain applications.
>
> At least, you can point that out to them, as Eric suggested. Talking
> about Paul Kane, he will probably around.


My point was not to criticize the DNSO effort but to point out that a) the
applicability of their results will be of limited (but still useful value)
to the Whois BoF effort and b) that discussing Whois in purely a domain
context is just plain wrong unless the BoF consciously determines this
limitation and reduces the scope accordingly. In other words, if the goal is
to replace or augment 954, then let's say so, but be extremely clear that
the range of applications based on 954 or not purely domain-specific. If on
the other hand, the goal is to augment the functionality of domain-specific
whois, then let's take a look at what is currently going on over port 43 and
look to rfc 1580 for historical guidance....

>
> I forgot the details of the agenda, but I hope one of the items is
> to discuss the scope of applications which wil use port 43 and
> theirs limits.
>



-rwr