Re[2]: [ga] consensus ? WXW redhering and JFC's smart DN

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 09:37 14/12/01, William X Walsh said:
>Friday, Friday, December 14, 2001, 12:17:43 AM, L Gallegos wrote:
> > Eric,
>
> > The point I was trying to make is that one cannot state categorically that
> > there are and will not not be errors in tranfsers that cause a domain to be
> > lost to the registrant.  Therefore, there is a necessity to protect the
> > registrant if it should occur.
>
>It does occur. In the event of the hijacking related incidents I've
>already related, the domains were returned to their original owners,
>after the two registrars investigated what happened an made sure that
>it was in fact a real case of a hijacking.  The registrars actually
>seem to work well together on fixing these kinds of issues.
>
>Nothing I can see indicates that it is even POSSIBLE to lose a domain in a
>registrar transfer (and the person you had contact me off list was not
>an example of a domain being lost during transfer, but was a result of
>a registrar not processing domain transfer requests in a timely
>fashion, causing the transfer to be denied by the losing registrar
>when it was done past the expiration date, and the gaining registrar
>refusing to refund the money (unlawfully in my opinion) and requiring
>her to pay again to transfer the same domain).
>
>But in the event something like this did in fact happen to occur (like
>Hell froze over or something  :) I'm confident the registrars would
>work to deal with it appropriately.  It is in their best interests to
>do so, and they have shown a history of doing so in similar
>situations.
>
>I really think this is a red herring issue.
>
>The Registrars are addressing important issues already that related to
>this, such as data escrow, and procedures for dealing with the closure
>of a registrar, etc.  The parts of the issue I've seen show that the
>registrars are setting a higher standard for themselves than ICANN has
>required, and I think that shows a real commitment by the registrars
>to provide for registrant protection in areas like this.

Dear WXW,
from personnal experience everything is possible. Also I do not rely at all 
on any Registrar or Registry to do anything. The reason why is that they 
have not the budget for it. So old people with a dedication to their 
company still have some reflex from the time they had money. But they go.

You see the decrease in quality every day and in staffing creating huge 
delays, lost of time with daily shifts and people to get explained again 
and again - you probably call your Registrar your own business hours, quite 
different at night your time. There obvious historical problems and no list 
cleaning.

I will give you an example. For one of my DN the zipcode has been swicthed 
to the city four or five years ago. Probably some manual rebuild or some 
discrpancy between a French enty and an US entry from a document (most of 
the codes are before the city name, not the zipcodes).

I tried for a long time to transfer that name. But the NSI program wanted 
to have a zip+city name and when it had them ... it did not martch. I 
thereofre sent mails over mails to get the DN transfered. Eventually I got 
it ... lost and got a lot of probles to get it back ... with the same 
problem so I cannot have it transfered. I understand there is a problem of 
authority: they do not have the right to change the data manually so they 
cannot correct the list. I suppose to have sweard people to clean the list 
and relating with the potential problem would be awfull cost.

The only solution is to add a password into the domain name entry. The 
person who has the password and only that person can get it changed how it 
wants. And the only solution to have a password which is not lost is to get 
it on a smart card. And the only solution to have the smart card not lost 
is to issue three cards : one to the customer, one to his bank, one to the 
NSI bank.
But to be sure that works with a reasonable cost and procedure is to have 
the domain names made non transferable without the domain and life long. 
You will note that if you have the domain name embodied in the smart card, 
the smard card is part of the physical property of the domain owner, and 
may certainly be the whole domain. But standard laws apply.

By the way the smart card solution is the only realistic solution to 
support the QuiEst approach which is the only reasonable parade to Passport 
and Porject Liberty while still working with them.

Jefsey














--
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