<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar
- To: kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Bashar Al-Abdulhadi <bashar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar
- From: Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 15:38:43 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZWfRaIKaiNAD1Szj7u4QQCC8u/l1ach026rpWxgaa06rAPVUCG6Yf1W2OtVe53hRgYLzlnSzI02JhkojrJhQsbtRJekWbUjdpQV1uKsn20lOkWS0tfLiNwWl3xz7X+zBN78kp/aXesNClmIVxali7WXamxXfsjHu9R/r0qizELc= ;
- In-reply-to: <008401c7763e$bdd56fc0$1701a8c0@WebBusiness>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thank you for your explanations. It seems as though we kind of have two approaches to the drop situation. Registrars say "we can now grab it". And Registrants want to use it as a type of escrow, for shifting the method of holding it.
Sorry but to my way of thinking the current situation is illsuited for either and it is causing a confusion.
Until it gets ironed out with real standards adopted, it would appear to be up to the agreement and Registrants would be well advised to shop for one of their liking and Registrars would do well to boldface and clarify so as not to get sued. The mere fact that it is iffy indicates lack of leadership in this regard.
I am going to assume that drops and transfers need to be handled as seperate issues.
Eric
---------------------------------
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|