Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Whois Output from "Thin Registry"

["Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23 Sep 2009, at 17:32, Rob Hall wrote:

> Michelle,
>
> First, we do actually know where our customers are doing whois  
> searches
> on our domains.  Every Registrar does, as we serve the data.  I can  
> tell
> you that not many get done at third party sites such as who.is and
> domaintools.  The vast majority get done on our website, and mostly  
> from
> logged in customers.

Ok

>
> And I think your solution is to propose a flag of some type like .ORG
> does that says they are in that 45 day auto-renew grace period.  I  
> think
> at first blush I would probably support that.

Good :)



>  One little thing would
> need to change, which is if the Registrar sent an explicit renew  
> during
> that period that it removed the flag, but didn't extend the domain for
> an addition year.  I would think this would be an easy flag, as you
> could apply it to ANY active domain that had not been explicitly  
> renewed
> that was 45 days after expiration.
>
> For example, in your .ORG example:
>
> Created On:14-Sep-2006 16:23:38 UTC
> Last Updated On:15-Sep-2009 13:46:21 UTC
> Expiration Date:14-Sep-2010 16:23:38 UTC
> Sponsoring Registrar:eNom, Inc. (R39-LROR)
> Status:OK
> Status:AUTORENEWPERIOD"
>
>
> I would not want an explicit renew to take the domain to 2011, but
> rather just 2010 and take the domain out of the auto renew period.  I
> suspect this is a change in the behavior at the Registry level.

Quite possibly


>
> Rob.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michele Neylon ::
> Blacknight
> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 12:06 PM
> To: gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Whois Output from "Thin Registry"
>
>
>
> On 23 Sep 2009, at 16:45, Rob Hall wrote:
>
>> Michelle,
>>
>> Can I ask a dumb question ?  Where do you think Registrants are
>> going to
>> do their whois lookups if not Registrars ?  And more specifically the
>> Registrar of record ?
>
> They can look them up via several semi-independent sites such as
> domaintools.com
>  or who.is
>
> To be perfectly honest neither of us  have any way of knowing how they
> are going to check them, but assuming that they'll go the "registrar
> of record" is a dangerous assumption
>
>
>>
>> I did a lookup of namescout.com on godaddy.com, and sure enough, they
>> showed the Registrar whois, with a link to the Registry whois if you
>> need it.  That is a perfect way to do it.   I think most Registrars
>> show
>> the Registrar whois, not the Registry whois.
>>
>> But I am not sure any of this is really relevant.  I think we all
>> understand how whois works.
>
> Whether we do or not isn't at issue.
>
> We work in this industry fulltime, so it would only be reasonable that
> we'd have a better understanding of how it all works.
>
> To give you a silly analogy ...
>
> I'd expect a mechanic to know how to strip down an engine, but I'd
> expect the manufacturer to produce a car where a non-technical driver
> (ie. me) can add water to the wipers without needing a PhD.
>
>>
>> The question is, is there a better solution to the epiry date
>> issue.  I
>> don't know of one, but if someone has one I would love to consider  
>> it.
>
> Have a look at my previous reply
>
> I wasn't talking specifically about dates - I was talking about  
> statuses
>
> What that means to my mind is providing an end user with a clear
> indication of what the real status of the domain was. Unfortunately
> with thin registries the whois display format isn't exactly uniform.
>
> Checking a domain for one of our clients for example:
>
> Domain Name: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.COM
>    Registrar: ENOM, INC.
>    Whois Server: whois.enom.com
>    Referral URL: http://www.enom.com
>    Name Server: DNS1.NAME-SERVICES.COM
>    Name Server: DNS2.NAME-SERVICES.COM
>    Name Server: DNS3.NAME-SERVICES.COM
>    Name Server: DNS4.NAME-SERVICES.COM
>    Name Server: DNS5.NAME-SERVICES.COM
>    Status: clientTransferProhibited
>    Updated Date: 05-sep-2009
>    Creation Date: 04-sep-2008
>    Expiration Date: 04-sep-2010
>
> The final line "Expiration Date: 04-sep-2010" would suggest that the
> domain is still active, whereas you'd need to look at the full whois
> to spot the line:
>
> "Creation date: 04 Sep 2008 14:29:12
> Expiration date: 04 Sep 2009 14:29:12"
>
> and the status isn't particularly clear either:
>
> "Status: Locked"
>
> (Apologies to Enom, but I needed an example to work with)
>
> The status on a .org I picked at random is clearer:
>
> "Domain ID:D128912353-LROR
> Domain Name:xxxxxxxxxxxx.ORG
> Created On:14-Sep-2006 16:23:38 UTC
> Last Updated On:15-Sep-2009 13:46:21 UTC
> Expiration Date:14-Sep-2010 16:23:38 UTC
> Sponsoring Registrar:eNom, Inc. (R39-LROR)
> Status:OK
> Status:AUTORENEWPERIOD"
>
> Regards
>
> Michele
>
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
> http://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://mneylon.tel
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
> US: 213-233-1612
> UK: 0844 484 9361
> Locall: 1850 929 929
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business
> Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
>

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business  
Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845