nanog mailing list archives
RE: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited
From: Dean Robb <pceasy () norfolk infi net>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 21:40:07 -0500
At 11:16 11/16/98 -0800, you wrote:
WorldNIC will setup a domain without an email address using a bogus worldnic.com email address if the owner of the domain wishes to keep his email address private. This is a practice all registrars should consider. And, since WorldNIC is another face of NSI, it would seem that this practice is well within their acceptable guidelines.
Too bad that it's also a violation of the Domain Registration Agreement v4.0: K. Warranty. Registrant warrants by submitting this Registration Agreement that, to the best of Registrant's knowledge and belief, the information submitted herein is true and correct, and that any future changes to this information will be provided to NSI in a timely manner according to the domain name modification procedures in place at that time. Breach of this warranty will constitute a material breach. L. Revocation. Registrant agrees that NSI may delete a Registrant's domain name if this Registration Agreement, or subsequent modification(s) thereto, contains false or misleading information, or conceals or omits any information NSI would likely consider material to its decision to approve this Registration Agreement.
WorldNIC is utilizing the database for marketing purposes which is something the old guard at NSI was totally against any ISP doing and in fact insisted on an agreement to those terms before giving us ftp passwords to pull down the .zone files.
Of course. NSI expects you to uphold YOUR end of the deal, but will not uphold THEIR end of the deal. Go read their SEC filings and you'll see their long term plan all spelled out. In that plan, they specifically plan to use their database of registration information for marketing and delivery purposes. Spammers should be investigated by Ken Starr! Dean Robb PC-EASY computer services (757) 495-EASY [3279]
Current thread:
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited, (continued)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Sarah Baker (Nov 17)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Paul Vixie (Nov 17)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Jared Mauch (Nov 17)
- RE: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Chris Mauritz (Nov 16)
- RE: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Chris Woodfield (Nov 16)
- RE: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Mike Reno (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Rodney Joffe (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Steven J. Sobol (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Mike Reno (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Steven J. Sobol (Nov 16)
- RE: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Dean Robb (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Steven J. Sobol (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Phil Howard (Nov 17)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Jared Mauch (Nov 17)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Rich Sena (Nov 21)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited Rodney Joffe (Nov 16)
- Re: RBL quandry - opinions hereby solicited John M. Brown (Nov 16)