nanog mailing list archives

Re: New ICANN registrant change process


From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 15:03:53 -0400

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.

On July 4, 2016 2:35:37 PM EDT, Mel Beckman <mel () beckman org> wrote:
I've worked behind the scenes for more than one of these outfits. I can
tell you that domain registrars are basically printing money. On the
other hand, I've also been the victim of domain hijacking. I can tell
you that the domain registrars involved were less than useless in
reversing the obviously fraudulent transactions. They basically said
"Not our problem. Deal with it."

That's on top of the other obviously unethical practices by registrars,
such as seizing nonexistent domain names following a prospective
buyer's whois search, sluggardly unlocking of domains, etc.

Something had to be done. Now it has been.   

To the registers whining about this change: 

      Not my problem. Deal with it. 

-mel beckman

On Jul 4, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Jay R. Ashworth <jra () baylink com> wrote:

I'll go ahead and assume I wasn't the last person to get this memo
(courtesy
Lauren Weinstein's PRIVACY Digest):


https://opensrs.com/blog/2016/06/icanns-new-transfer-policy-will-impact-business-customers/

It does seem that this is going to make life difficult for a bunch of
pretty
normal business processes.

If you didn't know about it either... ask yourself why not.

Cheers,
-- jra

-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                      
jra () baylink com
Designer                     The Things I Think                      
RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates       http://www.bcp38.info          2000 Land
Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727
647 1274

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


Current thread: