[nc-transfer] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] WLS proposal

[todd glassey]

The problem is more than just the submission of a false credential, it is
the operations of the Registrar with that false credential that compounds
the problem. I would suggest that an additional requirements such that the
registrars were required to ping each one of the addresses that their domain
managers have supplied and any that bounce more than once are flamed, and
the domain is pulled and held in suspense for an additional 30 days.

If you have a domain and you don't know whether its up or down in a months
time then its not too important and well should be flamed.

Todd Glassey
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
To: <simons at acm.org>
Cc: <james.love at cptech.org>; <marc at fuchsia.bijt.net>;
<nc-transfer at dnso.org>; <discuss at icann-ncc.org>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [nc-transfer] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] WLS proposal


> My proposal was *not* an endorsement of any US legislation.   What I mean
> by "accurate" whois data is that the person expressing interest in an
> expired domain has to be a real person, with a real billing address.
> That is already a requirement in the gTLD registry contracts.  It could be
> any real person, including a real person who is doing it for someone else.
>  This is in the context of a one person one chance lottery over expired
> domains.    If you did not think you could address the one person one
> chance approach, you could have a lottery among registrars, which are
> unique.
>   Jamie
>
>
> > Jamie,
> > What do you mean by "accurate" whois data?  Does this mean that you
> > support HR 4640, which would make it a felony to provide inaccurate
> > information, even including address info of the domain name holder?
> > I'm sure you appreciate the privacy implications of requiring domain
> > name owners, eg parents who have purchased domain names for their kids,
> > to provide their physical addresses.
> > Barbara
> > P.S.  While it's important that accurate whois information be provided
> > for the technical contact, I see no compelling reason for providing
> > accurate address information about the owner of the domain name.
> >
> > On 6/17/02 12:35 PM, "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Marc Schneiders wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> How do you make sure that I do not try to be 1000 persons, so
> >>> enhancing my chance at getting a domain in the lottery?
> >>
> >>   Well, I would require that you provide accurate whois data in order
> >>   to
> >> bid, and if you committed fraud, I would bar you from future
> >> participation.
> >>   You could also rely upon a financial transaction to confirm a real
> >> billing address.
> >>
> >> Jamie
> >>
> >>
> >> ------
> >> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
> >> http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love at cptech.org
> >> voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> >> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
>
>
> --
> James Love
> http://www.cptech.org mailto:james.love at cptech.org
> mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss