idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-weirds-object-inventory-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == There are 5 instances of lines with non-RFC2606-compliant FQDNs in the document. == There are 2 instances of lines with non-RFC6890-compliant IPv4 addresses in the document. If these are example addresses, they should be changed. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but was first submitted on or after 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is usually necessary only for documents that revise or obsolete older RFCs, and that take significant amounts of text from those RFCs. If you can contact all authors of the source material and they are willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, you can and should remove the disclaimer. Otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (Apr 2013) is 4000 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force L. Zhou 3 Internet-Draft N. Kong 4 Intended status: Informational S. Shen 5 Expires: October 3, 2013 CNNIC 6 S. Sheng 7 ICANN 8 Apr 2013 10 Domain Name Registration Data Access Protocol Object Inventory Analysis 11 draft-ietf-weirds-object-inventory-00 13 Abstract 15 WHOIS output elements from 124 TLDs were collected and analyzed. 16 This document describes the statistical analysis process and result 17 of WHOIS information. The purpose of this document is to build an 18 object inventory to facilitate discussions of domain name data 19 objects in WHOIS response. 21 Status of this Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 3, 2013. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 54 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 55 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 56 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 57 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 58 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 59 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 60 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 61 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 62 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 63 than English. 65 Table of Contents 67 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 2. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 69 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 4. Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 4.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 72 4.2. Public Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 73 4.2.1. WHOIS Data of Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 4.2.2. WHOIS Data of Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 75 4.2.2.1. Registrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 76 4.2.2.2. Admin Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 77 4.2.2.3. Tech Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 78 4.2.2.4. Billing Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 79 4.2.3. WHOIS Data of Nameserver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 80 4.2.4. WHOIS Data of Registrar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 81 4.3. Other Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 82 5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 83 5.1. Preleminary Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 84 5.2. Data Elements Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 85 5.3. Labels Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 86 5.4. Other Objects Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 87 6. Limitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 88 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 89 8. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 90 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 91 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 92 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 94 1. Introduction 96 Internet registries for both number resources and names have 97 historically maintained a lookup service to permit public access to 98 some portion of the registry database. Most registries offer the 99 service via the WHOIS protocol [RFC3912], with additional services 100 being offered via world wide web pages, bulk downloads, and other 101 services, such as RPSL [RFC2622]. 103 Although the WHOIS protocol specified in [RFC3912] is widely adopted 104 and supported, it has several shortcomings that limits its usefulness 105 to the evolving needs of the Internet community. For example, the 106 WHOIS protocol has not been Internationalized, it does not 107 consistently support Internationalized Domain Name (IDN, described in 108 [RFC5890]); WHOIS has no query and response format; and WHOIS 109 protocol does not support user authentication, access control for 110 differentiated access. 112 This document is aimed to build an object inventory to facilitate 113 discussions of domain name data objects in WHOIS response. Based on 114 this statistics result, it may help to form and specify the response 115 format. 117 In domain name space, there are now over 200 ccTLDs and 21 gTLDs. 118 Different domain name registries may have different WHOIS response 119 objects and formats. A common understanding of domain name data 120 format is critical. 122 This document describes the WHOIS data collection procedures and 123 gives a data object inventory analysis based on the collected data 124 from 106 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs. The statistics result includes port 43 125 response data and web response data. All the data objects are 126 classified into domain, contact, nameserver and registrar related 127 objects. Other objects that do not belong to above four categories 128 are viewed as private designed objects. 130 Since this is a document with statistics analysis and there are no 131 protocol specifications, the [RFC2119] language does not apply. 133 2. Methodology 135 WHOIS information, including port 43 response and web response data, 136 is collected following the procedures descibed below. 138 (1) A programming script is applied to collect port 43 response data 139 from 294 ccTLDs. "nic.ccTLD" is used as the query string which 140 is usually registered in a domain registry. Responses of 106 141 ccTLDs were received. 18 gTLDs' port 43 response data is 142 collected from their contracts with ICANN. So the sample size 143 of port 43 WHOIS response data is 124 registries in total. 145 (2) WHOIS data from web is collected manually from the 124 146 registries that have port 43 WHOIS responses. 148 (3) Some of the responses which are collected by program may not 149 seem to be correct. So data of top 10 ccTLD registries, like 150 .de, .eu and .uk etc., was re-verified by querying domain names 151 other than "nic.ccTLD". 153 (4) In accordance with the specification 4 of new gTLD applicant 154 guide book, [RFC5730], [RFC5731], [RFC5732] and [RFC5733], the 155 response data objects are classified into public and other data 156 objects. Public data objects are those which are defined in the 157 above two documents. Other objects are those which are self 158 designed data elements or objects in different registries. 160 (5) Data elements with the same meaning, but using different labels, 161 are grouped together. The numbers of registries that support 162 the data elements is calculated in the total count column. 164 3. Terminology 166 o Data element -- The name of specific response object. 168 o Label -- Different registries may have different naming ways for 169 the same data element. So there may be several labels with the 170 same meaning and belong to one group of data element. 172 o Most popular label -- The label which is most supported by the 173 registries. 175 o Number of labels -- The number of different labels. 177 o Total count -- The number of registries that support a certain 178 data element. 180 4. Analysis 181 4.1. Overview 183 WHOIS data is collected from 124 registries, including 106 ccTLDs and 184 18 gTLDs. All the 124 registries support domain query. Among 124 185 registries, 8 ccTLDs and 15 gTLDs support contact query. 10 ccTLDs 186 and 18 gTLDs support name server query. 4 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs support 187 registrar query. Domain WHOIS data contains 68 data elements that 188 use a total of 550 labels. There are total 392 other objects for 189 Domain WHOIS data. The raw data can be accessed with the following 190 link: WHOIS Statistcs Data File [Stat-Data-File] 192 4.2. Public Objects 194 As mentioned above, public objects are those data elements selected 195 according to new gTLD application guide book, [RFC5730], [RFC5731], 196 [RFC5732] and [RFC5733]. They are generally classified into four 197 categories: domain, contact, nameserver and registrar related 198 information. 200 4.2.1. WHOIS Data of Domain 202 WHOIS data of domain includes "Domain Name", "Creation Date", "Domain 203 Status", "Expiration Date", "Updated Date", "Domain ID", "DNSSEC" and 204 "Last Transferred Date". The following table gives the element name, 205 most popular label and corresponding numbers of TLDs and labels. 207 +-------------------+-------------------+------------+--------------+ 208 | Data Element | Most Popular | No. of | No. of | 209 | | Label | TLDs | Labels | 210 +-------------------+-------------------+------------+--------------+ 211 | Domain Name | Domain Name | 118 | 6 | 212 | Creation Date | Created | 106 | 24 | 213 | Domain Status | Status | 95 | 8 | 214 | Expiration Date | Expiration Date | 81 | 21 | 215 | Updated Date | Modified | 70 | 20 | 216 | Domain ID | Domain ID | 34 | 5 | 217 | DNSSEC | DNSSEC | 14 | 4 | 218 | Last Transferred | Last Transferred | 4 | 3 | 219 | Date | Date | | | 220 +-------------------+-------------------+------------+--------------+ 222 WHOIS Data of Domain 224 Analyzing the above data, about 95.16% of the 124 registries support 225 "Domain Name" data element; 85.48% of the 124 registries support 226 "Creation Date" data element; 76.61% of the 124 registries support 227 "Domain Status" data element. On the other hand, some elements such 228 as "DNSSEC" and "Last Transferred Date" are only supported by 11.29% 229 and 3.23% of all the registries seperatedly. 231 4.2.2. WHOIS Data of Contact 233 In domain name space, contacts are typically devided into registrant, 234 administrative contact, technical contact and billing contact. 236 4.2.2.1. Registrant 238 The following table shows all the contact information of registrant. 239 14 data elements are listed below. 241 +--------------------+---------------------+-----------+------------+ 242 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of | No. of | 243 | | | TLDs | Labels | 244 +--------------------+---------------------+-----------+------------+ 245 | Registrant Name | Name | 65 | 7 | 246 | Registrant Email | Registrant Email | 59 | 7 | 247 | Registrant ID | Registrant ID | 50 | 12 | 248 | Registrant Phone | Registrant Phone | 48 | 6 | 249 | Registrant Fax | Registrant Fax | 44 | 6 | 250 | Registrant | Registrant | 42 | 4 | 251 | Organization | Organization | | | 252 | Registrant Country | Country | 42 | 6 | 253 | Code | | | | 254 | Registrant City | Registrant City | 38 | 4 | 255 | Registrant Postal | Registrant Postal | 37 | 5 | 256 | Code | Code | | | 257 | Registrant | Registrant | 32 | 4 | 258 | State/Province | State/Province | | | 259 | Registrant Street | Registrant Street1 | 31 | 16 | 260 | Registrant Country | Registrant Country | 19 | 4 | 261 | Registrant Phone | Registrant Phone | 18 | 2 | 262 | Ext. | Ext. | | | 263 | Registrant Fax Ext | Registrant Fax Ext | 17 | 2 | 264 +--------------------+---------------------+-----------+------------+ 266 Registrant 268 Among all the data elements, "Registrant Name", "Registrant Email" 269 and "Registrant ID" are the top 3 data elements. 271 4.2.2.2. Admin Contact 273 The following table shows all the contact information of 274 administrative contact. 14 data elements are lsted below. 276 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 277 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of | No. of | 278 | | | TLDs | Labels | 279 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 280 | Admin Street | Address | 64 | 19 | 281 | Admin Name | Admin Name | 60 | 9 | 282 | Admin Email | Admin Email | 54 | 12 | 283 | Admin ID | Admin ID | 52 | 16 | 284 | Admin Fax | Admin Fax | 44 | 8 | 285 | Admin Phone | Admin Phone | 43 | 9 | 286 | Admin Organization | Admin Organization | 42 | 9 | 287 | Admin Country Code | Country | 42 | 7 | 288 | Admin City | Admin City | 35 | 5 | 289 | Admin Postal Code | Admin Postal Code | 35 | 7 | 290 | Admin | Admin | 28 | 5 | 291 | State/Province | State/Province | | | 292 | Admin Country | Admin Country | 17 | 5 | 293 | Admin Phone Ext. | Admin Phone Ext. | 17 | 3 | 294 | Admin Fax Ext. | Admin Fax Ext. | 17 | 3 | 295 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 297 Admin Contact 299 Among all the data elements, "Admin Street", "Admin Name" and "Admin 300 Email" are the top 3 data elements. 302 4.2.2.3. Tech Contact 304 The following table shows all the information about domain name 305 technical contact. 14 data elements are listed below. 307 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 308 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of | No. of | 309 | | | TLDs | Labels | 310 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 311 | Tech Email | Tech Email | 59 | 9 | 312 | Tech ID | Tech ID | 55 | 16 | 313 | Tech Name | Tech Name | 47 | 6 | 314 | Tech Fax | Tech Fax | 45 | 9 | 315 | Tech Phone | Tech Phone | 45 | 10 | 316 | Tech Country Code | Country | 43 | 9 | 317 | Tech Organization | Tech Organization | 39 | 7 | 318 | Tech City | Tech City | 36 | 4 | 319 | Tech Postal Code | Tech Postal Code | 36 | 7 | 320 | Tech | Tech | 30 | 4 | 321 | State/Province | State/Province | | | 322 | Tech Street | Tech Street1 | 27 | 16 | 323 | Tech Country | Tech Country | 18 | 5 | 324 | Tech Fax Ext | Tech Fax Ext | 18 | 3 | 325 | Tech Phone Ext. | Tech Phone Ext. | 13 | 3 | 326 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 328 Tech Contact 330 Among all the data elements, "Tech Email", "Tech ID" and "Tech Name" 331 are the top 3 data elements. 333 4.2.2.4. Billing Contact 335 The following table shows all the information about domain name 336 billing contact. 14 data elements are listed below. 338 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 339 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of | No. of | 340 | | | TLDs | Labels | 341 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 342 | Billing Name | Name | 47 | 5 | 343 | Billing Fax | Fax | 43 | 6 | 344 | Billing Email | Email Address | 42 | 7 | 345 | Billing Country | Country | 38 | 4 | 346 | Code | | | | 347 | Billing Phone | Phone Number | 34 | 6 | 348 | Billing ID | Billing ID | 28 | 9 | 349 | Billing City | Billing City | 28 | 4 | 350 | Billing | Billing | 28 | 5 | 351 | Organization | Organization | | | 352 | Billing Postal | Billing Postal | 27 | 4 | 353 | Code | Code | | | 354 | Billing | Billing | 21 | 4 | 355 | State/Province | State/Province | | | 356 | Billing Street | Billing Street1 | 19 | 13 | 357 | Billing Country | Billing Country | 13 | 5 | 358 | Billing Phone Ext. | Billing Phone Ext. | 10 | 2 | 359 | Billing Fax Ext | Billing Fax Ext | 10 | 2 | 360 +--------------------+--------------------+-----------+-------------+ 362 Billing Contact 364 Among all the data elements, "Billing Name", "Tech Fax" and "Billing 365 Email" are the top 3 data elements. 367 4.2.3. WHOIS Data of Nameserver 369 114 registries (about 92% of all the 124 registries) have the 370 nameserver data element in their WHOIS response. But there are 63 371 different labels for this element. Top 3 labels for this element are 372 Name Server which is supported by 25% of all the registries, Name 373 Servers which is supported by 16% of all the registries and nserver 374 which is supported by 12% of all the registries. 376 +--------------+--------------------+-------------+---------------+ 377 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of TLDs | No. of Labels | 378 +--------------+--------------------+-------------+---------------+ 379 | NameServer | NameServer | 114 | 63 | 380 +--------------+--------------------+-------------+---------------+ 382 WHOIS Data of Nameserver 384 Some registries have nameserver elements such like "nameserver 1", 385 "nameserver 2" till "nameserver n". So there are more labels than of 386 other data elements. 388 4.2.4. WHOIS Data of Registrar 390 There are three data elements about registrar information. 392 +-------------------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ 393 | Data Element | Most Popular Label | No. of | No. of | 394 | | | TLDs | Labels | 395 +-------------------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ 396 | Sponsoring | Registrar | 84 | 6 | 397 | Registrar | | | | 398 | Created by | Created by | 14 | 3 | 399 | Registrar | | | | 400 | Updated by | Last Updated by | 11 | 3 | 401 | Registrar | Registrar | | | 402 +-------------------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ 404 WHOIS Data of Registrar 406 67.7% of the registries have sponsoring regitrar data element. 407 Elements such as "Created by Registrar" and "Updated by Registrar" 408 are supported by 11.3% and 8.9% of the registries. 410 4.3. Other Objects 412 So called other objects are those data elements that are self- 413 designed or are difficult to be classified. There are 392 other 414 objects altogether. The following tables lists the top 50 other 415 objects according to the data collection result. 417 +---------------------------------------+-------------+ 418 | Data Element | No. of TLDs | 419 +---------------------------------------+-------------+ 420 | Registrant | 41 | 421 | Phone | 32 | 422 | Technical contact | 26 | 423 | Administrative contact | 15 | 424 | source | 14 | 425 | fax-no | 13 | 426 | nic-hdl | 13 | 427 | Billing Contact | 12 | 428 | referral url | 11 | 429 | e-mail | 10 | 430 | WHOIS server | 9 | 431 | Admin Contact | 9 | 432 | Type | 9 | 433 | Website | 9 | 434 | zone-c | 8 | 435 | remarks | 7 | 436 | Registration URL | 6 | 437 | anonymous | 6 | 438 | anniversary | 6 | 439 | hold | 6 | 440 | nsl-id | 6 | 441 | obsoleted | 6 | 442 | Customer Service Contact | 5 | 443 | Customer Service Email | 4 | 444 | Registrar ID | 4 | 445 | org | 4 | 446 | person | 4 | 447 | Maintainer | 4 | 448 | Nombre | 3 | 449 | Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID | 3 | 450 | Trademark Number | 3 | 451 | Trademark Country | 3 | 452 | descr | 3 | 453 | url | 3 | 454 | Postal address | 3 | 455 | Registrar URL | 3 | 456 | International Name | 3 | 457 | International Address | 3 | 458 | Admin Contacts | 2 | 459 | Contractual Language | 2 | 460 | Date Trademark Registered | 2 | 461 | Date Trademark Applied For | 2 | 462 | IP Address | 2 | 463 | Keys | 2 | 464 | Language | 2 | 465 | NIC handle | 2 | 466 | Record maintained by | 2 | 467 | Registration Service Provider | 2 | 468 | Registration Service Provided By | 2 | 469 | Registrar URL (registration services) | 2 | 470 +---------------------------------------+-------------+ 472 Top 50 Other Objects 474 Some elements like "Registrant" are difficult to be classified into 475 any categories. A few registries have two levels of data elements, 476 for example: 478 Registrant: 479 Name: 480 Email: 481 ... 483 We do not think the first level of elements belong to any part. So 484 they are put into the scope of other objects. 486 Some other data elements, like "Remarks", "anniversary" and "Customer 487 service Contact" etc., are designed particularly for their own 488 purpose by different registries. 490 5. Conclusion 492 5.1. Preleminary Statistics 494 Some preliminary statistics conclusion could be drawn from the raw 495 data. 497 o All of the 124 domain registries have the oject names in their 498 responses although they are in various fomats. 500 o Of the 118 whois services contacted, 65 registries show their 501 registrant contact. About half of the registries (60 registries) 502 support admin contact information. There are 47 registries, that 503 is about one third of the total number, have technical and billing 504 contact information. And only 7 of all the 124 registries give 505 their abuse email in remarks part. No explicite abuse contact 506 information is provided. The 508 o There are mainly two presentation formats. One is key:value, the 509 other is data block format. Example of key-value format: 511 Domain Information 512 Query: na-nic.com.na 513 Status: Delegated 514 Created: 17 Apr 2004 515 Modified: 14 Nov 2010 516 Expires: 31 Dec 9999 517 Name Servers: oshikoko.omadhina.net 518 ns1.na.afrisp.net 519 ns2.na.afrisp.net 520 ... 522 Example of data block format: 524 Whois database 525 domain nic.vg 527 Domain Name nic.vg 528 Registered 1998-09-02 529 Expiry 2012-09-02 531 Resource Records 533 a 195.153.6.27 534 mx 10 terpsichore.william.org 535 www a 195.153.6.27 537 Contact details 539 Registrant, 540 Technical Contact, 541 Billing Contact, 542 Admin. Contact AdamsNames Reserved Domains (i) 543 These domains are not available for registration 544 United Kingdom 545 Identifier: neams048s 547 Servidor Whois de NIC-Venezuela (.VE) 549 Este servidor contiene informacion autoritativa exclusivamente 550 de dominios .VE Cualquier consulta sobre este servicio, puede 551 hacerla al correo electronico whois@nic.ve 553 Titular: 554 Jhonny Valera (nic.ve-dom) jhovalera@conatel.gob.ve 555 Comision Nacional de Telecomunicaciones 556 Av. Veracruz con calle Cali, Edif Aguila, Urb. Las Mercedes 557 Caracas, Distrito Capital VE 558 0212-9090493 (FAX) +582127718599 560 o 11 registries give local script responses. The WHOIS information 561 of other registries are all represented in English. 563 5.2. Data Elements Analysis 565 Top 10 data elements are as follows: 567 +----------------------+-------------+ 568 | Data Element | No. of TLDs | 569 +----------------------+-------------+ 570 | Domain Name | 118 | 571 | Name Server | 114 | 572 | Creation Date | 106 | 573 | Domain Status | 95 | 574 | Sponsoring Registrar | 84 | 575 | Expiration Date | 81 | 576 | Updated Date | 70 | 577 | Registrant Name | 65 | 578 | Admin Street | 64 | 579 | Admin Name | 60 | 580 +----------------------+-------------+ 582 Top 10 Data Elements 584 Most of the domain related WHOIS information is included in the top 585 10 data elements. Other information like name server and registrar 586 name are also supported by most registries. 588 We did a cumulative distribution analysis of all the data elements. 590 (1) About 5% of data elements are supported by over 111 (90%) 591 registries. 593 (2) About 30% of data elements are supported by over 44 (35%) 594 registries. 596 (3) About 60% of data elements are supported by over 32 (26%) 597 registries. 599 (4) About 90% of data elements are supported by over 14 (11%) 600 registries. 602 From the above result, we can conclude that only a few registries 603 support all the public objects, most of the registries support just 604 parts of all the objects. 606 5.3. Labels Analysis 608 The top 10 labels of different data elements include: 610 +-------------------+---------------+ 611 | Labels | No. of Labels | 612 +-------------------+---------------+ 613 | Name Server | 63 | 614 | Creation Date | 24 | 615 | Expiration Date | 21 | 616 | Updated Date | 20 | 617 | Admin Street | 19 | 618 | Tech ID | 18 | 619 | Registrant Street | 16 | 620 | Admin ID | 16 | 621 | Tech Street | 16 | 622 | Billing Street | 13 | 623 +-------------------+---------------+ 625 Top 10 Labels 627 As explained above, name server label is a unique example that many 628 registries define the name server elements from "nameserver 1" till 629 "nameserver n". So label numbers of name server are much more than 630 other elements. Other elements about date, street name have more 631 labels. 633 A cumulative distribution analysis of label numbers was done. About 634 90% of data elements have more than 2 Labels. So it is very 635 necessary to specify a standard and unified format for object names 636 of WHOIS response. 638 5.4. Other Objects Analysis 640 According to statistics result, there are 392 other data objects in 641 total that are not easy to be classsified or privately owned by 642 various registries. Top 50 other objects are listed in the table in 643 section 4.3. You can find that various different objects are 644 designed for some particular purpose. So in order to ensure 645 uniqueness of JSON names used in the Restful Whois service, 646 establishing an IANA registry is a necessary requirement. 648 6. Limitation 650 o The input "nic.ccTLD" maybe is not a good choice. 652 o The classification of local script data elements may not be 653 accurate. 11 registries give local script responses. 655 o The extension data elements are used randomly by different 656 registries. It is difficult to do statistical analysis. 658 o Sample sizes of contact, name server and registrar queries are 659 small. 661 * We only use "Whois contactID/nameserver/registrar" as the query 662 commands to check. 664 * Some registries may not support contact, name server or 665 registrar queries. 667 * Some may not support query contact by ID. 669 * Contact information of some registries may be protected. 671 7. IANA Considerations 673 This document does not specify any IANA actions. 675 8. Security considerations 677 This document does not does not provide any other security services 678 or introduce any additional considerations. 680 9. Acknowledgements 682 This document has been reviewed and improved by the design team. The 683 authors especially thank the following individuals who gave their 684 suggestions and contributions to this document: Guangqing Deng, 685 Frederico A C Neves and Ray Bellis. 687 10. Normative References 689 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 690 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 692 [RFC2622] Alaettinoglu, C., Villamizar, C., Gerich, E., Kessens, D., 693 Meyer, D., Bates, T., Karrenberg, D., and M. Terpstra, 694 "Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL)", RFC 2622, 695 June 1999. 697 [RFC3912] Daigle, L., "WHOIS Protocol Specification", RFC 3912, 698 September 2004. 700 [RFC5730] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)", 701 STD 69, RFC 5730, August 2009. 703 [RFC5731] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) 704 Domain Name Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5731, August 2009. 706 [RFC5732] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) 707 Host Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5732, August 2009. 709 [RFC5733] Hollenbeck, S., "Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) 710 Contact Mapping", STD 69, RFC 5733, August 2009. 712 [RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for 713 Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework", 714 RFC 5890, August 2010. 716 [Stat-Data-File] 717 Kong, N., Zhou, L., and G. Deng, "WHOIS Statistics Data 718 File", July 2012, . 721 Authors' Addresses 723 Linlin Zhou 724 CNNIC 725 4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District 726 Beijing, Beijing 100190 727 China 729 Phone: +86 10 5881 2677 730 Email: zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn 732 Ning Kong 733 CNNIC 734 4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District 735 Beijing, Beijing 100190 736 China 738 Phone: +86 10 5881 3147 739 Email: nkong@cnnic.cn 740 Sean Shen 741 CNNIC 742 4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District 743 Beijing, Beijing 100190 744 China 746 Phone: +86 10 5881 3038 747 Email: shenshuo@cnnic.cn 749 Steve Sheng 750 ICANN 751 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 752 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 753 United States of America 755 Phone: +1.310.823.9358 756 Email: steve.sheng@icann.org