Reply to Ross Rader - Re: [ga] VeriSign complains...

[Derek Conant <dconant@dnsga.org>]

I will start my reply by stating that it appears VeriSign is claiming that
Tucows has engaged in slamming or poaching VeriSign customers
(http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/168146.html).

Another issue is that the Registrant customers are VeriSign's first, and it also
appears that VeriSign is contractually obligated to its customers.  As you know,
there are a lot of creative tactics that can be deployed by competing
Registrars, Registrar Affiliates and Registrar Resellers unbeknownst to the
Registrant.

What exactly does Tucows gain from it opposing VeriSign's "default
no-acknowledgement" position.

Derek Conant
DNSGA President and Chairman

"Ross Wm. Rader" wrote:

> > There may be a problem with relying on competing Registrars to
> > authenticate transfer requests.  First, the current Registrar is
> > contractually obligated to the Registrant.  It appears that the current
> > Registrar has a responsibility to make certain that its customer is aware
> > that a transfer request has been initiated through a competing Registrar.
> > You can believe that some Registrants choose established and reliable
> > Registrars like NSI for registering domain names.  It may be the case that
> > not all Registrars are as established and as reliable as NSI.  It appears
> > possible for competing Registrars and their affiliates to cause a real
> > problem for Registrants and current Registrars if competing Registrars are
> > relied upon for authenticating transfer requests.
>
> What facts do you base this opinion on?
>
> -rwr

--
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