Not having a change-all-nameservers is also dangerous: We trade secondary name service with another ISP. They made some changes and suddenly, one of our secondary name servers was gone.
Our customers felt the impact right away, and we knew about the problem an hour or two before the root-zone update (at noon and midnight Eastern time) but there was simply no way to change all of them, one at a time, before the cutoff, so quite a few of them didn't get changed in time. I'm not being critical of Perl as a language choice, but not all of us are fluent in Perl -- and time to study Perl is sadly lacking (I'm sure we all have this complaint at some level). I understand your comments, and I understand that it may not fit how you use OpenSRS, but it is something we need here. -- Lynn -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 12:54 AM To: Lynn W. Taylor; 'Charles Daminato'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk Lynn, A change-all nameservers feature is a very dangerous feature and might cause some problems. What if a curious users starts pushing buttons to check out the change-all nameservers feature, and then all of the sudden a few of their other web sites stop working. Oops... more service calls for everyone. I think OpenSRS already took that problem into consideration before they released the manage.cgi If you really want a change-all nameservers feature, that can be done readily by modifying the manage.cgi code from your end. As for nameservers changes: I'm thinking a locking-feature that will also allow "nameserver" changes at the same time would works better than what is in effect right now. I rarely ever hear of any problems from people hijacking and changing nameservers. However, I hear a bit more about problems with faulty registrar transfers. Jonathan Lee Tech Manager 415-682-3859 http://123cheapdomains.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lynn W. Taylor Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:50 AM To: 'Charles Daminato'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk Yeah, I understand that.... Maybe others will comment, but I think for the two narrow areas where I'd like this (name servers and now locking) we can live with that. It is less of a problem for things like contact changes, because those basically happen instantly and we can say "change the technical contact for all domains in the profile" -- what we can't say is "change all nameservers for all domains in the profile" and I really want that. -- Lynn -----Original Message----- From: Charles Daminato [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:30 AM To: Lynn W. Taylor; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk We could consider this. Queuing requests opens a huge can of worms on states and inconsistencies and reporting and error handling. It's a lot larger project (logistically, technically) than simply supplying a real-time interface. But I will take it under advisement :) Charles Daminato OpenSRS Product Manager Tucows Inc. - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Lynn W. Taylor > Sent: May 3, 2002 2:21 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk > > > Chuck, > > What would really be great is if we could do this without a > limit: simply accept the requests and queue them for later processing. > > Same for name server changes -- someone with a bunch of these > doesn't care that much how long it takes as long as it happens soon. > > If I'm worried about a domain I can deal with that one domain. > > -- Lynn > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Daminato [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:07 AM > To: George Kirikos; Frank Michlick; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk > > This enhancement is already in the works (we're targetting 50/shot) and > should be available in the next maintenance cycle (mid-late june) > > Charles Daminato > OpenSRS Product Manager > Tucows Inc. - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > Behalf Of George Kirikos > > Sent: May 3, 2002 2:02 PM > > To: Frank Michlick; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Domain Locking In Bulk > > > > > > Hi Frank, > > > > --- Frank Michlick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Try this one - modify as you like. Please keep in mind it's just a > > > quick hack > > > and it's not supported. > > > > For those who use the RWI only, it would be cool if a similar > > enhancement could be made. The simplest way would be to "clone" the > > code used for the Renewal Management section. Instead of having 2 > > columns, one would simply have a single column, with the "Set Auto > > Renew" checkboxes column replaced with the Domain Lock status. The drop > > down list box for the term would be removed, naturally. > > > > This way, we could do 40 locks/unlocks at a time. :) Also, one could > > see at a glance which names are locked, and which are not. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > George Kirikos > > http://www.kirikos.com/ > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > > http://health.yahoo.com
