RE: [DNS] Why have a policy?

RE: [DNS] Why have a policy?

From: Larry Bloch <larry.bloch§>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:49:00 +1000

For the 50-odd possibly dodgy registrations a month out of 14,000, is it
worth sacrificing the beneficial goal of automated registrations?

Do we really want to visually look at and make a call on 14,000
registrations to put a few of them on auDA alert? It seems a far better
allocation of resources to deal with the issues as they arise via a dispute

And it still doesn't deal with the reality that there is a spectrum of
dodginess and a wide range of levels of experience and training amongst
operators. It seems its really unfair to registrants to have a wide ranging
set of practices in play. It should be a principle that all registrations
are dealt with in a completely uniform manner, and that will never happen if
rules are being applied subjectively by (say) 50 operators at 22 registrars.

Should we be staying away from hiring people who haven't been in Australia
for at least 5 years because they will be unfamiliar with local 'well known
names'? It's a minefield of mediocrity. The only equitable system is one
where human decision making is kept to a minimum and then applied in a
rigorous and consistent manner. 

Even more so as unlike so many industries, this is one where we CAN do that.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Owen [mailto:tony&#167;] 
> Sent: Monday, 4 April 2005 3:56
> To: dns&#167;
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Why have a policy?
> > Whilst may be at one end of the 
> spectrum, there is 
> > a whole range and it is impossible for 22 registrars to 
> apply uniform 
> > methodologies to all names in the spectrum.
> I realise that it wouldnt be practical to research every domain name 
> registered, and since have given the matter a little thought.
> I would like to make 2 points:
> 1) Perhaps the system could be altered slightly to made more 
> effective, it 
> is not always a good idea to throw the baby out with the bath water.
> If a registrar gets a request that it is not "comfortable" 
> with, the name is 
> put on "hold" for the client, and the final approval / denial 
> rests with 
> AUDA. It would be simple to implement as a trial, and would 
> lessen the 
> "burden" on the reigstrar while still maintaining the 
> integrity of the 
> system.
> 2) I dont have a problem with someone "pushing the limit" to validate 
> "rights" to a name ... I have and at this 
> point still dont 
> supply the service lol - but if it is basically abused en 
> mass, then the 
> risk of a "DNA" type problem could emerge. A registrar who 
> over a two day 
> period gets a heap of requests from one entity for this style 
> of domain 
> would have to have their head firmly planted in the sand not 
> to realise the 
> applicant is probably upto no good.
> Cheers Tony 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => 
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without 
> permission of the 
> author, further information at the above URL.
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC