RE: last-verified-date

["James M Woods" <jwoods@netstormit.com>]

Rick,

I think this is an excellent inclusion to the specs. I support it, so
long as its adopted as being optional at the registry level. As an aside
I also see some third party business applications opportunities by
including this..but I digress.

To stir the pot a bit... are contacts the only objects we'd care to have
optionally last verified?

Thoughts?

James

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se [mailto:owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se]
On Behalf Of Rick Wesson
Sent: November 14, 2002 4:05 PM
To: 'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'
Subject: last-verified-date



One of the items on the agenda for tuesday is a proposal for an element
of contacts objects. I'd like to get some discussion going on this so we
can stay in the 10 minutes allocated to the topic in our session.

2.9 Last Verified Date

The date the contact had the opportunity to affirm that the information
associated with the contact is correct. Registries MAY set policy on how
checking is preformed and what if any procedure a registrar MUST apply
to ensure correct Registrant data.


The concept is to add some quality assurance mechanism to the registrant
data and to make available for the publishing of the data in WHOIS or a
CRISP protocol so that end-users can have an indicator as to the last
date the information was verified.

I appreciate any thoughts the group has on this proposal.

thanks,

-rick