nanog mailing list archives
RE: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role]
From: <michael.dillon () bt com>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 15:28:42 +0100
There is no need for rapidly unannounced updates by theregistries. That simply isn't true.
You're right. Just like there is a very strong need for an airline that offers 5 minutes from curb to seat checkin service. The need exists but it ain't gonna be filled anytime soon because the government prohibits such things. The government mandates delays and multiple vetting processes between the time you step on the curb and the time you sit in your airplane seat. Same with buying a handgun in most states and in Canada. Same with opening a business in most jurisdictions. You have to go to cityhall and apply for a license first. Why should domain name registries be special and be exempt from these normal processes of vetting and registering?
Now, the reality is, accidents do happen. However, they happen infrequently enough that you probably do not need to be able to change your nameservers through the web interface and have them reflected 5 seconds later. I do think that it would be very valuable to have the capability to call someone at a registrar to deal with issues like this for the infrequent times that it is needed, or perhaps allow one such change per week(?) through the web interface.
We had a situation rather like that about 6 weeks ago and we did call Network Solutions and they did fix the problem by putting the lame nameservers back in the .COM zone where the customer wanted them to be. I believe the customer switched registrars in order to make sure that their lame nameservers stayed lame. So at least some registrars do have helpdesks available by phone who can get wierd issues sorted out for you. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role], (continued)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Sam Stickland (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joseph S D Yao (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Douglas Otis (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joe Greco (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Daniel Senie (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joe Greco (Apr 03)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Dorn Hetzel (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joseph S D Yao (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joe Greco (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joseph S D Yao (Apr 04)
- RE: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] michael.dillon (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joe Greco (Apr 04)
- RE: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] michael.dillon (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joe Greco (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Warren Kumari (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Joseph S D Yao (Apr 04)
- RE: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Donald Stahl (Apr 04)
- Re: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] Robert E. Seastrom (Apr 04)
- RE: summarising [was: Re: ICANNs role] michael.dillon (Apr 04)