> What I suspect happened was that the NS change was never made in the first > place and domain direct changed the pointers on the NS record to a default > expired page when it thought the domain was set to expire - this was likely > yesterday. I will note that the June 2, 2002 zone update shows no change in > status for the domain in question (both from a DNScentral and Domaindirect > perspective - ie - neither NS cluster gained or lost the domain name). The > June 3 data hasn't completed crunching yet, so it may shed some more light, > but I suspect that my earlier analysis will hold true.
Unfortunately, I do not have access to the root zone files. All of my research was based on: 1) Client complains that domain just started resolving to a dd page. 2) I verify that we are the RSP (since April 26), that the domain has not expired, and (via manage.cgi) that the authoritive name servers were correct. 3) I see that the root are advertising dd's name servers for the domain. 4) I check dd's name servers and see they are resolving the domain to 216.40.33.117 5) Our logs show the domain began resolving to our IP address on May 7, 2002. 6) We try contacting someone at Tucows/OpenSRS and leave a voice mail message 7) I log back in to manage.cgi and try to save the name servers again (without making any changes). The save appears to be successful. Now we just need to wait for root zones to update. 8) This morning the roots are advertising the correct name servers. 9) The domain is again resolving to 130.94.96.190 10) Checking dd's name servers now show the zone for the domain has been deleted. Based on what Ross has provided, we have the following theory: DD didn't close the account in their system until today (since their zone file for the domain was still there yesterday). The manage.cgi name server change performed last month didn't make it through to the roots. DD updated their zone file for the domain to point to our IP address around May 7. DD changed their zone file for the domain to point back to their IP address on June 2. And finally, DD removed their zone file for the domain on June 3. Playing off of this theory, I have the following question: Have manage.cgi name server changes been known to sometimes not make it to the registry but still appear as if they have in the manage.cgi interface? Which leads to the following question, are the name servers listed via manage.cgi ever compared to what the registry thinks the name servers should be? Thanks for all of the comments thus far. Like I said before, discussing all of this out in the open makes Tucows a far better company than Verisign could ever dream to become.
