Mailing List Archive

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, David H. Holtzman wrote:

> Until further notice, Network Solutions will be temporarily suspending the
> process of deleting domain names for which payment has not been received.
> In recent weeks the InterNIC has been spammed repeatedly with tens of
> thousands of requests by domain name speculators attempting to register

What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at
http://www.domainbrokers.com/asp/. I just tried to register a domain for
a customer, and found that it had been registered the day before by
domainbrokers.com. I believe they have no intention to use the domain
name. All they hope to do is sell it, probably for $1000. They appear to
have setup no DNS records other than NS records for it.

Companies like this that piss in the domain name registration pool should
be banned from registering domains.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/message.
Florida Digital Turnpike |
________Finger jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______

...
>What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at

This is NOT an operational issue. The InterNIC's capricious modification
of their SOPs is NOT operational. Pathetic whines about failing to register
domains is NOT operational...

>I believe they have no intention to use the domain name.

There is no requirement to use a domain name in any way, shape, or form.

> Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will

E

You wrote:
> ...
> >What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at
>
> This is NOT an operational issue. The InterNIC's capricious modification
> of their SOPs is NOT operational. Pathetic whines about failing to register
> domains is NOT operational...

And your point is?

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology
Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592

In message <Pine.LNX.3.95.970709111719.600w-100000@inorganic5.fdt.net>, Jon Lew
is writes:
> On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, David H. Holtzman wrote:
>
> > Until further notice, Network Solutions will be temporarily suspending the
> > process of deleting domain names for which payment has not been received.
> > In recent weeks the InterNIC has been spammed repeatedly with tens of
> > thousands of requests by domain name speculators attempting to register
>
> What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at
> http://www.domainbrokers.com/asp/. I just tried to register a domain for
> a customer, and found that it had been registered the day before by
> domainbrokers.com. I believe they have no intention to use the domain
> name. All they hope to do is sell it, probably for $1000. They appear to
> have setup no DNS records other than NS records for it.
>
> Companies like this that piss in the domain name registration pool should
> be banned from registering domains.


One step would be to prioritize domains which correspond to physical
networks. If an organization is actually connected to the network
they can get one prioritized registration for the domain name for
their network. In the event of a conflict a domain registration for
an actual network would take precedence to a psuedo-domain having only
MX records and pointing to a web server on a provider's network. Dial
accounts would not qualify since they are not permanently connected.

There would still be conflicts, but this might make domain name
speculation a thing of the past.

Curtis

With regards the issue of prospectors trying to grab deleted domains,
perhaps the InterNIC should use a similar policy to what the FCC uses
for radio callsigns (amateur radio, at least): Callsigns which are
abandoned due to change of callsign, death, or expiration of the license
are unavailable for re-issue for two years. This allows for the previous
owner (if not dead) to reclaim the callsign (or a relative of the
deceased to do so). It also helps avoid identity confusion.

Seems like the same rules would make sense in the domain name context,
and would avoid problems where billing errors or other problems dealing
with the Internic could result in loss of a domain name.

--
-------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie dts@openroute.com
OpenROUTE Networks, Inc. http://www.openroute.com/
508-898-2800

I think this would be extremely unfair to legitimate domain registrants
who are truly interested in a name (and willing to pay the registration
fee) due to the random (and extreme) number of registrations that these
domain speculators are registering. You are essentially putting a domain
name that has never been paid for for two years, because some speculator
registered it. This would give the speculators even more reason to
extract the value of the name from someone who may want it - "If you don't
pay me, its gone for two years....."

Ed

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Daniel Senie wrote:

:With regards the issue of prospectors trying to grab deleted domains,
:perhaps the InterNIC should use a similar policy to what the FCC uses
:for radio callsigns (amateur radio, at least): Callsigns which are
:abandoned due to change of callsign, death, or expiration of the license
:are unavailable for re-issue for two years. This allows for the previous
:owner (if not dead) to reclaim the callsign (or a relative of the
:deceased to do so). It also helps avoid identity confusion.
:
:Seems like the same rules would make sense in the domain name context,
:and would avoid problems where billing errors or other problems dealing
:with the Internic could result in loss of a domain name.
:
:--

Edward Fang wrote:
>
> I think this would be extremely unfair to legitimate domain registrants
> who are truly interested in a name (and willing to pay the registration
> fee) due to the random (and extreme) number of registrations that these
> domain speculators are registering. You are essentially putting a domain
> name that has never been paid for for two years, because some speculator
> registered it. This would give the speculators even more reason to
> extract the value of the name from someone who may want it - "If you don't
> pay me, its gone for two years....."

Hmmm. Guess I was thinking it would only apply to domains that actually
WERE
already active, not ones that'd never gone live...

My concern was that a company whose registration hadn't gotten paid for,
whether due to error at the company or at the Internic, should not be
a possible target of extortion by speculators making a grab for their
domain name.

Guess I have to agree with other folks that domains should be PAID for
before
they appear in the root servers. Too much abuse otherwise.

>
> Ed
>
> On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Daniel Senie wrote:
>
> :With regards the issue of prospectors trying to grab deleted domains,
> :perhaps the InterNIC should use a similar policy to what the FCC uses
> :for radio callsigns (amateur radio, at least): Callsigns which are
> :abandoned due to change of callsign, death, or expiration of the license
> :are unavailable for re-issue for two years. This allows for the previous
> :owner (if not dead) to reclaim the callsign (or a relative of the
> :deceased to do so). It also helps avoid identity confusion.
> :
> :Seems like the same rules would make sense in the domain name context,
> :and would avoid problems where billing errors or other problems dealing
> :with the Internic could result in loss of a domain name.
> :
> :--

--
-------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Senie dts@openroute.com
OpenROUTE Networks, Inc. http://www.openroute.com/
508-898-2800

And what do you do when the domain was not paid.... you block a potentially
ligit user from taking it over ???

At 22:06 97-07-09 -0400, Daniel Senie wrote:
>With regards the issue of prospectors trying to grab deleted domains,
>perhaps the InterNIC should use a similar policy to what the FCC uses
>for radio callsigns (amateur radio, at least): Callsigns which are
>abandoned due to change of callsign, death, or expiration of the license
>are unavailable for re-issue for two years. This allows for the previous
>owner (if not dead) to reclaim the callsign (or a relative of the
>deceased to do so). It also helps avoid identity confusion.
>
>Seems like the same rules would make sense in the domain name context,
>and would avoid problems where billing errors or other problems dealing
>with the Internic could result in loss of a domain name.


Sincerely

----------------------------------
Francois Beauregard
FBorg@fbli.com
FBLI.COM
We love feedbacks and live by them

Sales : Sales@fbli.com 1 (888) FBLI.COM
Tech support : Support@fbli.com 1 (514) 349-0455
Internet Web : http://www.fbli.com
ICQ : 1907537

Montreal, Canada
----------------------------------

On 09-Jul-97 Jon Lewis wrote:
>What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at

>Companies like this that piss in the domain name registration pool should
>be banned from registering domains.

How about dealing with the situation in the same manner that some have been
dealing with spammers? The offending registers should be cut off by their
network providers. If NSI states that whoever.com is flooding them with
registrations, and whoever.com is one of your customers, confront them. If they
don't yeild, cut off their service.

Abuse of the registrar on this magnitude could be considered a denial of service
attack, or more likely, going against the self governing, self regulating ideas
that the internet runs on. Regardless of your feelings about how NSI is running
their service, this kind of behavior is not acceptable.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Potter Internet Alaska, Inc.
gdead@alaska.net Grateful Admin
InterNIC Handle: BGP4 ;-)
PGP Public Key: http://www.alaska.net/~gdead/gdead.asc
Key ID: 1024/F12AC0B1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Note: these views are mine, and don't reflect the views of my employer.