<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [registrars] .net thick/thin discussion
- To: Larry Erlich <erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [registrars] .net thick/thin discussion
- From: "Marcus Faure" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:05:48 +0200 (CEST)
- Cc: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, registrars@xxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <40FFD716.1CFB@DomainRegistry.com> from Larry Erlich at "Jul 22, 2004 11:02:46 am"
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
even with a thin model, the first point of contact is the registry, e.g. you
have to go to the Internic whois first before you know which other whois
to query. Therefore the registry must be monitored closely, but IMHO doing your
own whois does not help here. Sitefinder is a keyword for this discussion.
As long as we do not have standardized whois output, a thin model is more
difficult to deal with. I also think that the per-registrar thin model that
Bruce proposed will cause this extra work, and honestly I do not believe that
the average user understands it.
A registration service provider can be handled with an optional maintainer
field in the whois. We have one on the CORE whois that defaults to the member
number, but can also contain a URL.
Yours,
Marcus
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|