On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 31, 2012, at 1:05 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
>
>>
>> On 12-10-31, at 14:17 , Andrew Rist <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2012 8:54 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/30/2012 04:14 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/30/2012 1:39 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>>> Looking at old threads, I'm a bit confused about the outcome of this one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/ldigtivvyy2su62u
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Currently some of the ".com" domains don't even show up on the DNS radar,
>>>>>> and on the others remaining registered by Oracle. Was it the outcome of
>>>>>> this discussion to have Oracle transfer the registrations to the ASF?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought that was perhaps what we wanted to do, but ti doesn't seem to
>>>>>> have happened yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew, can you shed some light? Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4906
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess it's not been on the top of any of our lists. The domains were
>>>>> opened up for transfer on the Oracle side (not sure if that times out).
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the update. I'm not sure what this means though. :/
>>>>
>>>> Oracle didn't renew them and now these domains are up for grabs?
>>> Unfortunately - that does seem to be the case. I'm not sure if that is
>>> really a problem, though.
>>
>> I don't think it is.
>>
>>
>>> A lot of these domains were acquired as a defensive measure, and I am not
>>> sure there is currently a substantial problem with these 'similar domains'.
>>
>> Quite. I was working with the legal team at Sun and then Oracle on these and
>> a) not many of them and b) the efforts were targeted and defensive and did
>> not really map to any aggressive outreach strategy. Actually, to say a nice
>> thing about a certain set of companies, the efforts really were directed to
>> shelter the most active communities.
>
> I did a series of whois requests on these domains. They seems to be
> registered with Tucows on auto-renewal:
>
> eg:
> Domain ID:D159673109-LROR
> Domain Name:IT-OPENOFFICE.ORG
> Created On:16-Jul-2010 19:33:15 UTC
> Last Updated On:17-Jun-2012 06:09:50 UTC
> Expiration Date:16-Jul-2013 19:33:15 UTC
> Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. (R11-LROR)
>
>
>>
>>> Also, if a problem does arise, we have the trademark to protect the brand.
>>
>> Yes, but perhaps we can start a new thread or threads that can finalize
>> this issue and re-frame it not as a set of defensive tactics but as a
>> strategy to promote AOO, and to use the domains as vehicles for that
>> promotion….
>
> The thread name is correct. This is old business..
>
> Choice 1 - work to transfer domains to the ASF so that the AOO can "do
> something" with these domains.
>
> In order to take control of the DNS for each domain we need someone with
> Apache Infrastructure karma to work in concert with the proper person from
> Oracle in order to transfer all of these domain registrations.
Right. If they're on "auto-renewal", would this mean that Oracle got
billed and paid for them or ???
>
> Choice 2 - ignore these domains. Let Oracle know we don't care. They can make
> their own choice about renewing these domains or not.
>
I don't know when the renewal dates are but my DNS info indicates they
sill *belong* to Oracle, so my assumption is they've been renewed by
Oracle. So, maybe we're really at Choice 1. (at least many of the
*.org ones resolves, the *.com ones don't. I didn't check them all
however.)
If we do still want them, we need an Oracle contact.
Assuming we want to proceed with this, Andrew can you provide an
Oracle contact via a JIRA ticket to INFRA, and we'll see where we get
with this.
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> -louis
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never
dealt with a cat."
-- Robert Heinlein
