[sig-policy] prop-084-v002: Frequent whois information update request
Version 2 of the proposal, 'Frequent whois information update request',
has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the
Policy SIG at APNIC 30 at the Gold Coast, Australia, 24-27 August 2010.
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
before the meeting.
Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
This new version of the proposal reflects feedback from the community
received on the Policy SIG mailing list and includes two new elements
to the proposal described in section 4:
- Section 4.4 proposes how APNIC could make follow-up contact
with non-responsive object owners.
- Section 4.5 proposes APNIC maintain two publicly available
lists that document resources associated with non-responsive
object owners, or known invalid contact details.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
express your views on the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
tell the community about your situation.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
prop-084-v002: Frequent whois information update request
Author: Tobias Knecht <tk at abusix dot com>
Date: 9 August 2010
This is a proposal for APNIC to regularly contact all APNIC current
account holders with resources in the APNIC Whois Database to ask them
to actively check that all their details in whois are up to date.
To actively check details, the object owner has to log into the MyAPNIC
Portal and acknowledge the accuracy of data in their object(s) or update
all existing objects if needed. The update date will be shown in the
"changed" attribute of every single object.
2. Summary of current problem
Whois database data accuracy has been a big issue for years now. There
have been several approaches to get better data accuracy within whois
information all over the world.
There are two main reasons for data inaccuracy in whois:
a) Wrong data is published to camouflage illegal actions.
b) Wrong data is published because object owners forget to update
the whois information as changes occur within their organization
(staff changes, etc.)
A secondary problem is data incompleteness:
- Sometimes, there are changes to the structure of whois data, such
as additional mandatory objects or attributes (for example, the
IRT object). Object owners usually do not immediately make these
changes to the objects they are responsible for. So there is
always data missing in the whois database.
3. Situation in other RIRs
ARIN conducts an annual POC (point of contact) validation process:
There is no similar proposal or policy in other RIRs; however, if the
current APNIC proposal is successful in the APNIC region, the author
plans to submit a similar proposal for AfriNIC, LACNIC, and RIPE
4. Details of the proposal
It is proposed that APNIC:
4.1 Send an update notification for all existing objects to the
corresponding responsible organization once every X months.
This notification will explain that object owners must log in the
MyAPNIC Portal and verify all objects they are responsible for.
The objects covered by this proposal are:
Object owners must actively click and acknowledge the correctness of
the objects they are responsible for.
- If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added
(for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via
- If a new object or attribute is made mandatory via another
APNIC policy, then the responsible organization will be
required to make this update, if not already made, at the time
Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any
changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will
include the date the owner verified the object. This will give
users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified
the accuracy of the data.
4.2 Send update notifications to responsible organizations at times
shorter than the regular period described in section 4.1 if APNIC is
made aware that the organization's object contain invalid
For example, APNIC would send such a notification if notified of
invalid information via the form at:
4.3 Include a link in all whois output to APNIC form for reporting
invalid contact information.
4.4 Handle non-responsive object owners in the following way:
- Owners will have 60 days from the time of initial message from
APNIC to confirm that their objects are up to date.
- If the object owner does not respond to the initial message,
reminder emails will be sent 10, 30 and 50 days after the original
- After the 60-day period has passed, if the object owner has not
verified their object details, APNIC will add the ranges of
resources maintained by the non-responsive object owner to the
publicly available list of resources described in 4.5.1 below.
4.5 Maintain two publicly available lists:
4.5.1 Resources associated with non-responsive object owners
- This list would include resources associated with object
owners who have not responded to APNIC's requests as
described in section 4.4 above.
4.5.2 Resources associated with known invalid contact details
- This list would include resources that have been reported
to contain invalid contact details.
- It is left to the discretion of the APNIC Secretariat
whether to include an explicit remark in the corresponding
database objects to show that the information in the objects
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
- A frequent reminder and the need to actively verify will solve the
problem of forgetting to update objects.
- All objects will follow the latest requirements for registration
in the APNIC Whois Database. For example if there is an mandatory
field added within X months every object will be updated.
- More people will use the MyAPNIC Portal.
- No disadvantages are foreseen.
6. Effect on APNIC members
Members have to update or verify their objects once every X months.
7. Effect on NIRs
It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to
implement a similar service to keep their whois database up to date. But
this would be another proposal.