RE: [registrars] Third Draft Standard form of authorisation for use by losing registrars after a transfer is initiated

[Gary Boyd <Gary.Boyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

OK

But just so that I am clear. The losing registrar email is only designed to
be an alert to the registrant (thereby providing them with an opportunity to
block the transfer) and therefore the registrant is not required to
undertake any further action to complete the transfer process.

-----Original Message-----
From: Elana Broitman [mailto:ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 09 October 2003 14:38
To: Tim Ruiz; Gary Boyd; registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Third Draft Standard form of authorisation for
use by losing registrars after a transfer is initiated


The policy allows losing registrars to confirm
And this is particularly important given the potential for hijacking names
Gary - remember that if the losing registrar tries to confuse the
registrant, the registrant can simply ignore it, resulting in an ack if the
gaining registrar got confirmation

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Tim Ruiz
Sent:	Thu Oct 09 07:49:28 2003
To:	'Gary Boyd'; registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject:	RE: [registrars] Third Draft  Standard form of authorisation
for  use by losing registrars after a transfer is initiated

Gary,

Would it be better if we require the gaining registrar's confirmations
to go out individually so the registrant gets 1000 emails?

As long we are going to continue to require the transfer process to
start with the gaining registrar we are going to have these types of
problems.

Given the international scope we are dealing with there is no way we
can, nor should we, stop the losing registrar from confirming with their
customers that they wish to transfer.

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gary Boyd
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 2:21 AM
To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Third Draft Standard form of authorisation for
use by losing registrars after a transfer is initiated

Bruce,

I hope my interpretation is correct.

If a message is to be sent by the losing registrar after the registrant
has
provided authorisation to the gaining registrar, then the opportunity to
obstruct transfers will still exist as is the case today.

This is particularly noticeable if one looks at a large number of
domains
used in a previous example by Tim, the gaining registrar may use one
email
to gain authorisation for 500 domains but the losing registrar may
choose to
send one per domain.

Regards,

Gary  

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 09 October 2003 03:53
To: Tim Ruiz; Gomes, Chuck; Donny Simonton; Rick Wesson; Tina Dam;
ross@xxxxxxxxxx; Elana Broitman; Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
grant.forsyth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; sricciardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Karen
Lentz; halloran@xxxxxxxxx; Ellen Sondheim
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Third Draft Standard form of authorisation for
use by losing registrars after a transfer is initiated



Hello Tim,

> 
> 
> Remind me again why we need to name the losing registrar? The 
> less we have to parse out of the dozens of different whois 
> formats for COM and NET names the better/quicker this process 
> will work for the registrant.

I think there may be some confusion.

In the context of the message from a losing registrar to a registrant to
confirm whether the registrant did authorise the transfer, the name of
the losing registrar/reseller is the name of the party actually sending
the email.  The notification in this instance is from the registry.

Ie
<insert name of losing registrar and/or name of reseller> received
notification 
on <insert date of notification> that you have requested 
a transfer to another domain name registrar. 

Could be an email from GoDaddy, stating:
GoDaddy received notification on 10 Oct that you have requested a
transfer to another domain name registrar.

Or an email from Melbourne IT, to a registrant relating to a domain name
registered through a reseller (e.g Yahoo) could state:
Yahoo received notification on 10 Oct that you have requested a transfer
to another registrar.

So the intent of the field is to allow you as the losing registrar
seeking to check whether the registrant did authorise the transfer
control over how the communication is branded.  There is no parsing of
emails, etc it is purely something your system would generate.

If you wish you could simply say "we", but that would be your choice:
Ie
We received notification on 10 Oct that you have requested a transfer to
another domain name registrar.

So the field in this standard message is a branding field.

Note there are two separate standard messages:
>From Gaining registrar to registrant before a transfer is initiated at
the registry
>From Losing registrar to registrant after the transfer is initiated at
the registry

Regards,
Bruce


This email has been scanned for viruses by NetBenefit using Sophos
anti-virus technology



This email has been scanned for viruses by NetBenefit using Sophos
anti-virus technology







This email has been scanned for viruses by NetBenefit using Sophos
anti-virus technology



This email has been scanned for viruses by NetBenefit using Sophos anti-virus technology