> Note that the only bit of info. needed is the administrator's E-Mail > address, not full contact info.
The expiry date would be extremely useful. > On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:49:39 -0700, Dave Warren wrote: > >>�>�Yes spammers will in the end get email addresses. But I firmly > >>�>�believe there is more than enough intelectual horsepower among the > >>�>�internet community to come up with a way to make whois mining > >>�>�intractable ..... > >> > >>�Maybe: > >>�- for "anonymous" users, limit the number of WHOIS requests to a very > >>�small number / IP / day, and change e-mail addresses to ****@domain > >>�- for "trusted" users (well, it is hard to define this... maybe this > >>�one is not needed at all), limit the number of WHOIS requests from > >>�the same user/day, and include e-mail addresses in the response > > > >Make it a registry command, each registrar can query the registry for the > >administrative and technical contact information. �The registry will then > >query the registrar of record, and if the registrar fails to provide a > >response they are billed $100 and the original registry is notified to try > >again ASAP. > > > >After that, if GoDaddy doesn't want to return email addresses, it's their > >own call. �At $100 per bogus answer, I bet they'll decide they'd rather lose > >the domain then pay $100 every few seconds. > > > >What will be done with the money? �I'm thinking third world countries, local > >charities, whatever. �Nobody profits, this is just designed to be an > >asskicking for those that don't play by the rules. > > > >Exceptions will be made for scheduled system outages, within a reasonable > >SLA. �Exceptions will also be made for honest accidental outages, but again, > >within a reasonable SLA. �You can't be down 23 hours and 59 minutes per day > >every day, or for any excessive period of time. > > > >Lastly, I'd like to see a cost imposed on the registrar if they choose to > >DAK a transfer unless they have disabled the domain IN ADVANCE. �By disabled > >the domain, I'm talking a full lock, NS dropped from the roots and > >everything. �This is intended to prevent a registrar like NetSol from > >denying transfers left right and center on their own. �In order for this to > >work, there would have to be some way for the end user to DAK without the > >registrar incurring a fee, this would get a bit more complex in a thin > >registry, but could be workable. >
