DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [registrars] Transfer Ballot

> > "A review of the IRDX seems to indicate
> > that a losing registrar couldn't deny a request
> > based upon reasonable belief that the registrar's
> > customer would not make such a request (and there
> > is no time, or no way, to verify it with the
> > current registrar). Example: My sister is on
> > vacation and a request has been entered to
> > transfer her name."

the particular case you suggest above is ironical since the document i
believe has been drafted to specifically take care of cases like the above.
lets analyse every possibility. understand that the current process mandates
that thelosing registrar obtain express approval from a binding authority of
the domain name. it also provides for the losing registrar to ask the
customer one final time as to whether they want to go ahead with the
transfer process and if the customer chooses against it then to prevent it

1. firstly if your sister was on vacation then she would not initiate a
trefre process knowing well that the standard process requires her to
approve it to the agining registrar

2. if your sister did initiate the process and then left urgently - I still
believe EMAIL which is the most common way for approval would be easily
acessible to her anywhere and I do believe most internet savvy audience
check their email frequently enuf to complete the approval process

3. assuming she did not have access to email there there is no way the
gaining registrar could obtain express approval from your sister and
therefore would not be able to send the trefer request under the current

4. if the gaining registrar decided to risk faking evidence at this stage to
get this one domain they would be risking a massive backlash - the document
provides for this too where a losing registrar can boycott auto-acks for a
particular gaining registrar if he believes that the process used by that
gaining registrar is inadequate.

I believe therefore that the document made by ross and elainina does cover
all possibilities for the case you have outlined above.

I dont see the argument then?

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>