ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Registrar problem reports


Oh no I do not think you should take this out of context with the *expired and
registered to "expireds are us" which are simultaneously listed with a
registrar/registry reseller for auction*.  Well we have them now what are we
going to do about it?  Chris and Andy what should we do?

Sincerely,
Eric

admin wrote:

> I don't know what kind of double-talk Gomes is giving here.  According to
> the messages sent previously from Gomes they currently have about 50,000
> domains locked because of their error.  In other words, because the registry
> made an error they are causing all kinds of problems for the registrars who
> registered these domains which is causing these registrars to lose money.
> These registrars happen to be in direct competition with Verisign.
>
> Note that the only problem that would occur if the registry did not lock the
> domains is that Verisign would not be able to collect every last $6 fee for
> every single domain year.  Nothing detrimental would happen to the domain
> owner at all.  There is also absolutely no explanation as to why the
> registry has locked the DNS settings.  Even if all their other claims were
> legitimate (which they are not) then they would only need to lock the
> registrar settings, not the DNS setting.
>
> Under the Tucows system one of the main selling points is that you no longer
> have to deal with NSI and e-mail templates to update the records.  This
> cannot be done when the registry lock.  further, the message sent out by
> Gomes of the Verisign registry says they may not even make manual changes if
> there are too many.
>
> Domain renewals under competition has a very low profit margin.  Once you
> start requiring manual changes with the registry lock (along with all the
> locks put on by the Verisign registrar) it makes it very difficult to keep
> prices low.  This is a coordinated effort by Verisign to disrupt the other
> registrars any way they can with the hopes of slowing the mass exodus away
> from Verisign.
>
> Even if there was a legitimate error there is no basis for taking
> weeks/months to correct it.  The fact that Mr. Gomes has been asked at least
> 5 times to explain why the corrections are taking so long.  Mr. Gomes has
> ignored every request and comes on the list with his usual double-talk that
> he has been giving for years.
>
> I suspect this a first test case so Verisign can see what they can get away
> with.    I would not be surprised if all kinds of errors like this started
> cropping up and Verisign will use it as an excuse to lock more domains and
> cause more disruptions.
>
> Russ Smith
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Gomes,
> Chuck
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:31 PM
> To: 'admin@consumer.net'; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar problem reports
>
> The VeriSign Registry did not lock your names except in the sense that any
> registrar may lock names in their registration system through RRP commands
> sent to the SRS.  What I am saying is the Registry did not take any action
> to lock your names except to provide an operational SRS.  We can take such
> action using the Registry Lock command but I am confident that that is not
> the case here.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: admin@consumer.net [mailto:admin@consumer.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 9:05 AM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar problem reports
>
> I don't know what was pointed out here but the Verisgn registry has locked
> several of my customer's domains for severa months.  Notices sent out by
> Verisign have indicated that these domains would be locked for several weeks
> (with no explanation why they are locked for so long) and indicated they may
> or may not be able to make manual changes in a timely manner.
>
> This locking of domains byVerisign coincided with the Verisign registrar
> claims of "slamming"
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/cochetti-to-lynn-16jul01.htm.
> Meanwhile, the Verisgn registrar continues to lock domains without valid
> justifaction.  Many customers have to put their orders in 3 or 4 times
> before Verisign will release them.
>
> Verisign is disrupting the operations of competing registrars on several
> fronts.
>
> Below is the message I received from Tucows about the domains the Verisign
> registry has locked.  Gomes refuses to explain why these domain are being
> locked for so long:
>
> ==
>
> In June, VeriSign Registry accidentally auto-renewed several domains
> twice.  As a result, to prevent further problems, these domains have
> been placed on Registry-Lock.  The domain will function properly, but
> no transfers or renewals are allowed.  The expected time until they
> fix this is August 27th (at the earliest).
>
> Unfortunately, the only action we are allowed to perform on these
> domains is a nameserver change.  Following is a list of affected
> domains.  If you have a client that is getting the following error
> when attempting to change their nameserver:
>
> Unable to add nameserver: Registry error, domain's nameservers not
> updated [Domain status does not allow for operation]
>
> Then it is likely that they are affected by this problem.  Until these
> domains are fixed by VeriSign, you can email support@opensrs.org.  Be
> sure to include the domain name in question, and the nameservers you
> would like this domain to be updated with.
>
> ===
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@verisign.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:43 AM
> To: 'admin@consumer.net'; Roeland Meyer; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar problem reports
>
> Correction: as has been previously pointed out, the VeriSign Registry is not
> locking domains as suggested below.
>
> Chuck Gomes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: admin@consumer.net [mailto:admin@consumer.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:47 AM
> To: Roeland Meyer; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar problem reports
>
> The complaints I meant was concerning registrars not following the
> agreement.  specifically as it relates to registrar transfers.
>
> I have more than 100 complaints filed so far against Verisign, register.com
> and Names4 ever.  Even the verisign Registry is getting into the act and is
> locking domains.
>
> Dan Halloran does nothing and does not answer questions about what actions
> have been taken.
>
> Russ Smith
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roeland Meyer [mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:41 AM
> To: 'admin@consumer.net'; ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Registrar problem reports
>
> They do handle individual complaints. It is just that they out-source it to
> WIPO. It's called UDRP.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: admin@consumer.net [mailto:admin@consumer.net]
> > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:35 PM
> > To: ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: [ga] Registrar problem reports
> >
> >
> >  http://www.internic.net/cgi/registrars/problem-report.cgi
> >
> > It says:
> >
> > "ICANN does not resolve individual customer complaints. ICANN is a
> > technical-coordination body. Its primary objective is to
> > coordinate the
> > Internet's system of assigned names and numbers to promote stable
> > operation."
> >
> > Why doesn't ICANN resolve individual complaints?  If they
> > don't then who
> > does?  Don't they manage the registrar contracts?  If so,
> > then why don't
> > they handle individual complaints?
> >
> > Russ Smith
> > http://TheNic.com
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>