<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Feedback on front running questions
- To: "gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-rap-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-rap-dt] Feedback on front running questions
- From: George Kirikos <icann+rap@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:30:20 -0400
As per my prior email:
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-rap-dt/msg00308.html
I'd still appreciate a list of the domain names he attempted to
register, to see if they were "worthy" of being registered, i.e. their
quality.
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
416-588-0269
http://www.leap.com/
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Marika Konings<marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Please find below the response received from Ben Edelman to the follow-up
> questions posed by members of the RAP WG. Note that the report was
> commissioned by the ICANN compliance department.
>
> With best regards,
>
> Marika
>
> From: Ben Edelman [mailto:ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 7:19 PM
> To: 'Stacy Burnette'
> Subject: RE: Questions on front running study
>
> Thanks for the further questions.
>
> Attached is the list of URLs where domain availability was checked. There
> are fewer than 600 entries because some URLs were checked repeatedly,
> consistent with the methodology detailed in my report.
>
> To Greg's second question: As I mentioned in my prior message, I did not
> have occasion to classify the particulars of each URL where I checked domain
> availability. So I don't know the answer to that question. My tests began
> at the URLs listed in the attachment. Then, as detailed in my methodology,
> I used a domain registration or search link or form on (or linked from) each
> page to check the availability of a test domain on each of the test URLs.
>
> On Greg's third question: Checking the registry would have been a fine
> alternative to DNS queries. As Greg suggests, checking the registry would
> offer certain benefits. With INFO as well as COM and NET, I'd need to run
> several kinds of checks, but it's certainly doable. However, the
> methodology I used was the methodology described in my report, not the
> alternative Greg suggests.
>
> I'll let ICANN speak to the question of what part of ICANN requested the
> report.
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|