Domain shut downs by Registrar?
Has this process matured or is it still a wild-west kind of thing? Last time I saw this, it was with a LARGE registrar and we had to threaten them with a TRO before they'd even put their lawyers on the phone. It was a few years ago. This time the issue is with DOTSTER and they never even bothered to contact our support desk about the issue with the customer domain (and we're listed as the support contact, etc). So if anyone has any advice, or anyone from DOTSTER wants to contact me offline, that'd be great. Thanks in advance, DJ
We use OpenSRS and never have these issues. Many of the other major registrars will freeze domains for whatever reason they choose. OpenSRS basically fulfills their duties to ICANN and leaves it alone at that. The only domain I have ever seen them get involved with was along time ago when someone stole a domain from Network Solutions using fraudulent paperwork and then managed to transfer it out. Jeff On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Deepak Jain <deepak@ai.net> wrote:
Has this process matured or is it still a wild-west kind of thing? Last time I saw this, it was with a LARGE registrar and we had to threaten them with a TRO before they'd even put their lawyers on the phone. It was a few years ago.
This time the issue is with DOTSTER and they never even bothered to contact our support desk about the issue with the customer domain (and we're listed as the support contact, etc).
So if anyone has any advice, or anyone from DOTSTER wants to contact me offline, that'd be great.
Thanks in advance,
DJ
-- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications - AS32421 First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions
We use OpenSRS and never have these issues. Many of the other major registrars will freeze domains for whatever reason they choose. OpenSRS basically fulfills their duties to ICANN and leaves it alone at that. The only domain I have ever seen them get involved with was along time ago when someone stole a domain from Network Solutions using fraudulent paperwork and then managed to transfer it out.
I am also happy with OpenSRS, but I think it is fair to assume that since they are incorporated in Pennsylvania, they would comply with orders from a US court. We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar? R's, John
I'm not asking them to evade court orders, but rather keep their face out of my business unless absolutely required. Other major registrars seem to have a major issue with this. Jeff On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
We use OpenSRS and never have these issues. Many of the other major registrars will freeze domains for whatever reason they choose. OpenSRS basically fulfills their duties to ICANN and leaves it alone at that. The only domain I have ever seen them get involved with was along time ago when someone stole a domain from Network Solutions using fraudulent paperwork and then managed to transfer it out.
I am also happy with OpenSRS, but I think it is fair to assume that since they are incorporated in Pennsylvania, they would comply with orders from a US court.
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
R's, John
-- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications - AS32421 First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
what's super fun here is that often in conversations with registries about domains used for malware/spam/etc there's a conversation about: "but we can't just shutdown a domain, we need the registrar to do that... legal/contractual restraints prohibit us..." interesting that in THIS case the registry just took the action, was the domain registered through their registrar arm? -chris
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
interesting that in THIS case the registry just took the action, was the domain registered through their registrar arm?
They haven't had a registrar arm since they spun off Network Solutions in 2002. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:45 AM, John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
interesting that in THIS case the registry just took the action, was the domain registered through their registrar arm?
They haven't had a registrar arm since they spun off Network Solutions in 2002.
thanks... so, in this case, why did they take this action? why didn't they push the action to the registrar? or did they and the registrar refused to comply? (potentially because the domains weren't violating a TOS?) I suppose though, on the good side, we can expect the Verisign folks to now shutdown other domains we bring to their attention as malware/spamware/etc without protest? -chris
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 10:49:47AM -0500, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:45 AM, John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
interesting that in THIS case the registry just took the action, was the domain registered through their registrar arm?
They haven't had a registrar arm since they spun off Network Solutions in 2002.
thanks... so, in this case, why did they take this action? why didn't they push the action to the registrar? or did they and the registrar refused to comply? (potentially because the domains weren't violating a TOS?)
I suppose though, on the good side, we can expect the Verisign folks to now shutdown other domains we bring to their attention as malware/spamware/etc without protest?
Without a doubt. And all the pigs have been fueled and serviced, and are in all respects ready for flight. -- Mike Andrews, W5EGO mikea@mikea.ath.cx Tired old sysadmin
On Dec 3, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
thanks... so, in this case, why did they take this action?
When folks with guns and little sense of humor show up at your door with a sealed court ordered warrant relating to resources you have direct authority over, would you tell them to talk to a retailer for that resource? Oh, and don't forget VeriSign has a contract (cooperative agreement? whatever) involving the USG for the administration of COM/NET.
why didn't they push the action to the registrar? or did they and the registrar refused to comply? (potentially because the domains weren't violating a TOS?)
The registrar in question (GoDaddy) claims no one came to them and they had no idea what was going on (although that didn't stop them from blaming ICANN).
I suppose though, on the good side, we can expect the Verisign folks to now shutdown other domains we bring to their attention as malware/spamware/etc without protest?
"Got Warrant?" Regards, -drc
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 1:10 PM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
On Dec 3, 2010, at 5:49 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
thanks... so, in this case, why did they take this action?
When folks with guns and little sense of humor show up at your door with a sealed court ordered warrant relating to resources you have direct authority over, would you tell them to talk to a retailer for that resource? Oh, and don't forget VeriSign has a contract (cooperative agreement? whatever) involving the USG for the administration of COM/NET.
yup, convenient.
why didn't they push the action to the registrar? or did they and the registrar refused to comply? (potentially because the domains weren't violating a TOS?)
The registrar in question (GoDaddy) claims no one came to them and they had no idea what was going on (although that didn't stop them from blaming ICANN).
ha, why does the USG insist on making things difficult? and making the com/net/icann look like a kangaroo-court? (or that's my perception at times...)
I suppose though, on the good side, we can expect the Verisign folks to now shutdown other domains we bring to their attention as malware/spamware/etc without protest?
"Got Warrant?"
yea... so I wonder if the NCFTA folks would pony up warrants for things like the content highlighted by www.abuse.ch ? -chris
yea... so I wonder if the NCFTA folks would pony up warrants for things like the content highlighted by www.abuse.ch ?
They do all sorts of stuff, but for obvious reasons they don't gossip about it in public. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
On December 3, 2010, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
When folks with guns and little sense of humor show up at your door with a sealed court ordered warrant relating to resources you have direct authority over, would you tell them to talk to a retailer for that resource? Oh, and don't forget VeriSign has a contract (cooperative agreement? whatever) involving the USG for the administration of COM/NET.
It doesn't take guns. Verisign will steal domains from any registrar if they receive a US court order. I've seem them do it based on a Nevada default judgement where the client didn't even know there was a legal action under way. If you want to keep your domains, don't use .com or .net.
* John R. Levine:
We do remember, don't we, that the domain that started this discussion were shut down by Verisign, the registry, not a registrar?
interesting that in THIS case the registry just took the action, was the domain registered through their registrar arm?
They haven't had a registrar arm since they spun off Network Solutions in 2002.
I think Verisign DBMS acts as a registrar for ccTLDs. -- Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
I think Verisign DBMS acts as a registrar for ccTLDs.
No, they're a registry. Not the same thing. The registry holds the definitive database and manages the DNS zone. Registrars face the public and use some sort of API to pass the changes to the registry. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
Does anyone have any experience with eNom in this regard -- compliance and operating under 'pressure' from outside authorities? --sth On Dec 2, 2010, at 8:55 PM, Jeffrey Lyon wrote:
We use OpenSRS and never have these issues. Many of the other major registrars will freeze domains for whatever reason they choose. OpenSRS basically fulfills their duties to ICANN and leaves it alone at that. The only domain I have ever seen them get involved with was along time ago when someone stole a domain from Network Solutions using fraudulent paperwork and then managed to transfer it out.
Jeff
participants (11)
-
Alan Hodgson -
Christopher Morrow -
David Conrad -
Deepak Jain -
Florian Weimer -
Jeffrey Lyon -
John Levine -
John R. Levine
-
Jorge Amodio -
mikea -
sth