RE: [registrars] Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year Registrations

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

> > 2. Verisign suddenly begins to display expiry date in the internic 
> > whois. This may bring in a large amount of support level 
> confusion and 
> > headaches for the registrar
> 
> This would be a *very* good idea, as it would help a lot for 
> transfers. Because, other than doing that, there is no way 
> for a Registrar to know the ``true'' expiration date (some 
> Registrar whois are funky about this) and this is needed. 
> Customers would also be able to see the truth (when their 
> Registrar does not submit multi-year registrations to the Registry).
> 
> The date of creation would also be nice.

I think this is a good idea to bring before the transfers TF. One of the
issues that we are struggling with is the data accuracy in the whois.
With Afilias and Neulevel, this isn't so much of an issue as it is with
Verisign. I'll leave this open to commments until say Friday and then
bring forward a proposal based on our constituency's comments at our
next teleconference next week.




                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Got Blog? http://www.byte.org/blog

Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal:
http://www.byte.org/heathrow


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Patrick
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 4:04 AM
> To: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year 
> Registrations
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 11:07:01AM +0530, Bhavin Turakhia 
> took time to write:
> > 2. Verisign suddenly begins to display expiry date in the internic 
> > whois. This may bring in a large amount of support level 
> confusion and 
> > headaches for the registrar
> 
> This would be a *very* good idea, as it would help a lot for 
> transfers. Because, other than doing that, there is no way 
> for a Registrar to know the ``true'' expiration date (some 
> Registrar whois are funky about this) and this is needed. 
> Customers would also be able to see the truth (when their 
> Registrar does not submit multi-year registrations to the Registry).
> 
> The date of creation would also be nice.
> 
> Patrick.
>