You're forgetting that occasionally RSPs go out of business and that leaves
the end user in a lynch. We DO trust our RSPs - that's why they get the
message. Worst case scenario the end user doesn't get notification, so at
day zero we email them (and place the domain on hold - we're looking at
revising that policy).
This has nothing to do with our trust in our RSPs - we trust them,
implicitly, they are the core of our business. But all in all it comes down
to the actual paying customer - the domain registrant.
Charles Daminato
OpenSRS Product Manager
Tucows Inc. - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: easygoing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: April 27, 2001 11:40 AM
> To: Charles Daminato; easygoing; Loren Stocker; William X.Walsh;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: SUDDEN DEATH!!!, aka "Helping Resellers with delinquent
> names"
>
>
> I get sick of hearing this non-trust of RSPs by OpenSRS. If
> you are so frighten about the low quality of your RSPs, why
> don't you tighten up the system as to who you accept or do
> away with the RSP system?
>
> What RSP will not sent the end user the 60 and 30 day
> notice? And in our case, a 15 day notice.
>
> The goal of the RSP is to earn the renewal fee. No notice,
> no renewal, no fee.
>
> It is the responsibility of the RSP to notify the end user.
> It is the responsibility of the end user to act on this
> notice and to keep their email address up to date.
>
> To claim to be victims because the domain lapsed due to
> non-payment is asinine, given the OpenSRS system.
>
> Please note that I did not endorse the sudden death cut off
> of BulkRegister, I state a reasonable time frame
> deactivation was five days. If they are using the domain,
> they will take action within the five days. If they are not
> using it, most will not take action within the 40 days.
>
> My point is that the end user and the RSP must take personal
> responsibility instead of blaming the Registrar for the loss
> of the domain due to their non-payment. Whether it's zero
> tolerance or 40 days tolerance it is still the
> responsibility of the end user and the RSP to act to renew a
> domain name before it's expiration.
>
> We have over 300 domains for which we are personally
> responsible. We have never allowed one of them to elapse.
> We have client domains that we maintain. We do not allow
> them to elapse.
>
> Perhaps OpenSRS should require one snail mail letter be sent
> by the RSP to give notice to those who were too
> irresponsible to keep their email address up to date or who
> register the domain with a fake email address.
>
> And yes, we get those. We sent an email receipt for every
> domain registration, some bounce back to us because we were
> given a bad email address to register the domain name.
> Perhaps the RSP should be required to telephone those with
> bad email addresses to notify them?
>
> Perhaps OpenSRS should do away with RSPs and just run
> everything themselves to ensure responsible behavior.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> > Of Charles Daminato
> > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 8:49 AM
> > To: easygoing; Loren Stocker; William X.Walsh;
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: SUDDEN DEATH!!!, aka "Helping
> > Resellers with delinquent
> > names"
> >
> >
> > Hold on a second...
> >
> > The RSP gets 60/30 (etc) day notices. The
> > end-user gets ONE notice - day 0.
> > That's why we give them a little time, in case
> > their RSP hasn't been acting
> > responsably.
> >
> > Charles Daminato
> > OpenSRS Product Manager
> > Tucows Inc. - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of easygoing
> > > Sent: April 27, 2001 9:37 AM
> > > To: Loren Stocker; William X.Walsh; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: SUDDEN DEATH!!!, aka "Helping
> > Resellers with delinquent
> > > names"
> > >
> > >
> > > This is absolute nonsense.
> > >
> > > A domain holder receives notification 60 days prior to
> > > expiration, 30 days prior to expiration and in
> > our case 15
> > > days prior to expiration. Plus a final email
> > is sent on the
> > > day of activation.
> > >
> > > If a domain holder ignores all these notices
> > and allows the
> > > domain name to expire, then it is willful
> > neglect on their
> > > part and they have no room to complain.
> > >
> > > However, OpenSRS has stated on many occasions that the
> > > domain holder has 40 days from deactivation to renew the
> > > domain. Frankly I would like to see that
> > shorten to 5 days
> > > and then the domain make available for re-registration.
> > >
> > > If a domain is being used, it will be renewed
> > by the time
> > > the holder receives three warnings. If it is not being
> > > used, it should be returned to the general pool
> > so somebody
> > > else can use it.
> > >
> > > This issue here is individual responsibility.
> > The domain
> > > holder has the responsibility to renew the
> > domain within the
> > > renewal period if they wish to maintain the
> > domain. And at
> > > the low prices charged today, they have no one
> > to blame but
> > > themselves if they can not raise enough money
> > to renew the
> > > domain for another year within 60 days of renewal.
> > >
> > > How can you claim that you or the domain holder has been
> > > victimized by cancellation after receiving so
> > many advance
> > > warnings that payment was due?
> > >
> > > We hear the same cries when we suspend a
> > hosting account for
> > > non-payment. I forgot, it's not fair you turn
> > my site off.
> > > Never mind that we send them seven warnings,
> > one per day,
> > > that their payment was past due and the account would be
> > > suspend on the seventh day if payment was not received.
> > >
> > > It's not their fault they did not make the
> > payment. They
> > > are the victims, we are the bad guys for
> > suspending their
> > > account.
> > >
> > > It's time to grow up accept responsibility for one's
> > > actions.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
> > > > Of Loren Stocker
> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 6:43 PM
> > > > To: William X.Walsh; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: SUDDEN DEATH!!!, aka "Helping Resellers
> > > > with delinquent names"
> > > > Importance: Low
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yet, what's the real issue here?
> > > >
> > > > It's ICANN'S thoughtless policy that creates this
> > > > situation. As I understand
> > > > it, ICANN requires Tucows, NSI, Bulk and everyone
> > > > else to pay for renewals
> > > > IMMEDIATELY upon expiration. No grace period.
> > No refunds.
> > > >
> > > > If that's the case we have a HUGE conflict of
> > > > expectation between clients --
> > > > accustomed to getting 45 days grace (or more)
> > > > from NSI -- and the Registrar's
> > > > who MUST delete the domain to avoid the renewal
> > > > fees. The result is SUDDEN
> > > > DEATH! No grace. No "on-hold" period. No recourse
> > > > once the domain is lost. How
> > > > am I doing so far?
> > > >
> > > > Rather that talk about cost recovery, we should
> > > > be pressuring ICANN to provide
> > > > -- at a minimum -- a 30 day grace period. Even if
> > > > the domain goes "on-hold" at
> > > > expiration, the client has at least a reasonable
> > > > time to cure. Without this
> > > > change in policy, we're all going to see -- or be
> > > > victimized -- by Sudden
> > > > Death; valuable domains lost due to material
> > > > laspe of payment, say 2 days
> > > > late. NO ONE WILL STAND FOR THAT! We are only now
> > > > beginning to see the results
> > > > of this non-sensical policy.
> > > >
> > > > Has ICANN forgot that were selling a data record
> > > > with an incremental cost of
> > > > say 1,000 per $1? Is a little customer services
> > > > too much to ask for?
> > > >
> > > > Best, Loren
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "William X. Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thursday, April 26, 2001, 11:56:09 AM,
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > That would be a great deal of help to all of us!
> > > > > We do have a bunch of chargeback domains with
> > > > no way to recover our
> > > > > investment in those - between all of us, I am
> > > > sure we could come up with
> > > > > programing for a great auction site for these -
> > > > hey we would gladly host
> > > > > it free of charge on our servers if this ever
> > > > catches on!
> > > > > cheers
> > > >
> > > > So we do something that we've all been so
> > > > critical of other registrars
> > > > for doing?
> > > >
> > > > I don't think this is a very good idea at all.
> > > > The bad press NSI got
> > > > over this very issue should be a good indication
> > > > of what would happen
> > > > if the fastest growing registrar started
> > doing it also.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > William
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
