Hi all ,

I also agree with Paul Rendek and Bertrand comments "it's not efficient having two separate databases would solve this issue" .

I also support Gaurab’s idea to tag the authoritative of account holder. Besides i would like to add one point with Gaurab's idea ; Can we send verification message through mail to account holder's corporate and technical contact person by quarterly/half a year/yearly basis? 

if one of the contact person is not verify this information then account accessibility will be disable . Other wise it's really hard to make more reliable and accurate whois database that we are thinking .

 


Regards / Jahangir

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Bertrand Cherrier <b.cherrier@micrologic.nc> wrote:
Greetings everyone,

Many thanks to the APNIC Secretariat for this summary.

Indeed the time was short at the latest Policy SIG meeting in Auckland for every participant to have a voice, and we need to ear the members who could not attend !

One thing we all agree on is the importance of having an accurate whois contact information, and there is no perfect way to achieve this.
ARIN’s emailing policy and denying access to services to those marked as invalid is a start, but should be rather done on a quarterly basis.
But how would you force Operators to comply ? What to do with those who won’t bother to access the services and will leave their invalid contact ?
As Mark Foster said, they won’t do it unless compelled to do so ...

An idea would be to fine those who don't comply, and the fine will have to be a percentage of what the member is paying annually to the APNIC, so that it would be cheaper for him to engage the required resources to do the job than having to pay for the fine … it’s sad but it usually works to touch at one’s wallet !
The price for theses ressources can be (if not already) charged to the customer.

I have to agree with Paul Rendek, I don’t see how having two separate databases would solve this issue. Gaurab’s idea to tag the authoritative and the operator entries is very good, but then again it would not solve this issue.

It’s in everyone’s benefit to have a reliable and accurate whois database, and in a perfect world, everyone would do their part

That was my two francs (we don’t have cents)

Thank you

Bertrand

Le 19 mai 2016 à 00:10, Sumon Ahmed Sabir <sumon@fiberathome.net> a écrit :

Dear Colleagues,

The Policy SIG meeting at APNIC 41 included a session about incorrect
contact information registered in the APNIC Whois Database.

The Secretariat has prepared a summary of the discussion. You can read
it at the following URL.
https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/policy-sig/whois-data-quality

After the session, it was agreed we should continue discussing the
problem and encourage others to suggest ways the accuracy of this data
can be improved.

Please read the summary and share your thoughts on this mailing list.

Thank you

Sumon and Masato
APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy




Logo Bertrand Cherrier, Administrateur Systèmes
b.cherrier@micrologic.nc   www.mls.nc  
@micrologicnc   Sur facebook

Téléphone: 24 99 24
VoIP: 65 24 99 24
Service Clientèle: 36 67 76 (58F/min)


*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy



--