RE: Long term registrations - Was: RE: [ga] Fwd: LACTLD comments on Zone Transfers

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Steven Heath wrote:

> Now, Karl comments on a OTF of $25 and "particularly if updates were paid
> for on a per-occurrence fee schedule.". 
> 
> My opinion is any fee that is based on the registrant, or their agent, being
> charged to update details would result in lower quality of data compared to
> the a fee based on unlimited changes being allowed. Lower quality is not a
> good thing.

If someone doesn't bother to update their list of DNS servers, eventually
their domain becomes unusable, so there is more than a bit of
self-interest in keeping things up to date.  (Not updating one's DNS
delegation information is sort of like not putting oil into your airplane
motor - yes, you can skip it, but eventually bad things happen.)

As for whois data - I personally have yet to see what I believe to be a
compelling argument why the generic "I" should be required to publish "my"
personally identifiable information for the generic "your" convenience.

If we assume the challange mechanism I posited in a previous message, if
contact information is bad, and someone pays the registry to perform a
challange operation, and no reply is received in response, then losing the
registration is kind of a rather strong incentive for folks to make sure
that the registry has up-to-date contact information.

(Notice that in the challange mechanism that I propose, the name and
contact information of the registrant is not made available to the
challanger.)

		--karl--





--
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