Re: Merging RRP and Whois

[Stig Venaas <Stig.Venaas@uninett.no>]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 06:11:34PM -0500, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
> I wouldn't assume that the views are equivalent, or the scope of repository
> examination (temporal and spatial), or the underlying data, or even the
> basic original transaction. Maybe there is just one type of "original
> transaction", but I suspect legacy, transfer, bulk and so forth will have
> some property which distinguishes them from transactions in which the role
> of the registrar is minimal. I'm certain that the underlying data isn't
> equivalent, given the repurpose and recipient (marketers, law enforcement,
> original jurisdiction) aspects. I'm open on the unified vs disjoint model
> for repository examination, and examination ordering. Views just revisits
> the purpose and recipient issue, modified by the view construction policy.

I think one should consider merging the two but as you say the uses are a
bit different. One main difference is that whois must be able to handle
many queries per second and data is only read. I know this is obvious,
but it may restrict our choices.

> One of these two activites is critical infrastructure, the other is not.
>
> One of these two has a hard implementation date, as Ed mentioned, and the
> other does not, or has a schedule which requires ICANN's participation,
> if not other complications.

It might be best to not disturb this work too much, but rather see if
there are parts that can be reused, if it can be simplified for whois
etc.

Stig