Re: [ga-sys] Registrars want privacy

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

In defence of the principle behind the conversation surrounding the first
quote, the general conversation was concerning increased coordination
between registrars for the purpose of increasing registrant service. Every
day I get far too many calls from registrants with problems that take far
too long to resolve because "hotline" information about another registrar is
simply not available. With private hotline information like this available
to all registrars, it really would make it much easier to resolve customer
service issues.

As it currently stands, with a lot of registrars, issues of this nature
simply get queued up with the rest of their general inquiries. Not exactly a
great situation when one is trying to get to the bottom of a critical
support situation like a hijacking or something similar. If the information
described below was made generally available, the contacts would quickly be
overwhelmed by general nature inquiries and not the emergencies that we were
discussing.

We were not discussing making registrar data completely private, hidden or
otherwise obfuscated. I think that you will find that registrar contact data
is readily available for most types of inquiries with most registrars
because that is our business.

Hope this clarifies the original context somewhat.

Thanks,

-rwr



Tucows Inc.
t. 416.538.5492
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joanna Lane" <jo-uk@rcn.com>
To: "ga-sys" <ga-sys@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 7:00 AM
Subject: [ga-sys] Registrars want privacy


> In the "one rule for us and one rule for them" department:-
>
> Scott Allan wrote:-
> <snip>
> As promised, I have whipped together a (real quick) site to be considered
> as a proposed forum for aggregating Registrar contact information......
> http://www.registrar-contacts.com
> <snip>
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg00602.html
>
> Eric Schaetzlein replied:-
> Scott,
> that was quick - but I strongly ask you to put password-protection in
place
> - you can send the passwd to the list.
> Those contact infos are not for the general public.
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg00604.html
>
> - and with respect to WHOIS data -
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> I don't think the thick registry is the problem. It makes perfectly
> sense to store that information in a central place, that's what a registry
> is good for.
>
> On the other hand it should be defined by contract who "owns" the
customer,
> and that's clearly the registrar.
>
> I heard that .pro will also introduce a directory lookup service
> ("give me all lawyers in Germany")
>
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg00599.html
>
> I have nothing personal against Mr Schaetzlein, just questioning the logic
> that advocates a position that he is entitled to have his business contact
> details under password protection while my personal contact details may be
> sold by him or his colleagues for profit to anybody with $10,000 and
without
> my knowledge or consent.
>
> Regards,
> Joanna
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-sys@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-sys" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

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