nanog mailing list archives
Re: New ICANN registrant change process
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 15:48:49 -0400
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 13:23:04 -0400, Christopher Morrow said:
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com> wrote:Seems to me that the proper thing to be done would have been for Registries to deauthorize registrars on the grounds of continuous streams of complaints.<devils advocate hat> On what metric? Pure volume? Percent of registrations? type of complaint by similar x/y? </devils advocate hat> there are 'lots of complaints' against some registrars, but if you have ~20% of the .TLD market you're prone to get more volume than a 1%er, right? Also, this isn't REALLY the registrY's problem is it?
Jay definitely said 'registRARS'. And yes, it *is* the registrar's problem to ensure they aren't selling thousands of domain registrations to known spammers and other miscreants.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process, (continued)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Rubens Kuhl (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Jaap Akkerhuis (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Rubens Kuhl (Jul 07)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 06)