>I have, and I say they open to interpretation, and that they do not >require the level of investigation you are claiming they do.
If I am "any person", and I submit data to them that is wrong, the advisory says that they have to finish it through to get it corrected. Where are you seeing the "out-clause" you're giving them? >I do not believe that the registrar is at all required to make the >claim process easy, in fact I believe they should make it quite >difficult to file a fraudulent claim, requiring perhaps proof that the >complainant has made an attempt at verify the data is false. If I hand a registrar a personal domain registration with a street address of "1600 Pennsylvania Avenue", I don't need to wait for a response from the White House to know that Bill Smith doesn't actually live there. Nor should I need to show a phone record that "914-555-1212" didn't reach the owner of Widgets.com. It is (and should) be enough to say "look at the record, the data is obviously false". >The agreement says they have to accept them from anyone, but it does >not say HOW they must accept them, nor what requirements they may or >may not impose on them. It doesn't permit them to impose requirements. It says they must accept them from "any person" and then meet "reasonable measures". It then goes on to define "minimum" reasonable measures, which include actually starting the investigation process. (The "reasonable measures" seem to be to ensure that the registrar doesn't get a complaint "Foo.com has bad data, the real data should be XXXXX", and have them replace it, as well as to actually pay attention to the "corrected" data for integrity). >As with most things, Derek, things are not the black and white that >you and your black list group would like them to be. Actually, when it comes to RFC-compliance, things really are black and white, by and large. There are some grey areas, true, but this isn't really one of them. >I still don't understand why you don't just blockade off ALL domains >from your service, and only allow email from domains that have entered >into an agreement with you to do things your way. It would make much >more sense. Because that would make no sense. The only people being blocked are the ones who think the rules don't apply to them. By and large, those aren't the types of people I'd want to talk to anyway. In this case "my way" are the RFC's. D -- +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Thou art the ruins of the noblest man | | Derek J. Balling | That ever lived in the tide of times. | | | Woe to the hand that shed this costly | | | blood" - Julius Caesar Act 3, Scene 1 | +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+
