You are confusing two issues here - I apologize if I was not clear (you are
not the only one to be confused by this).
The feature I am speaking of, is the ability to offer a service to your
customers where they can protect their valuable names by locking them. It
would require some more secure auth system (as opposed to u/p through a
manage interface)to make any changes to a name once it was locked.
Regards,
sA
At 03:20 PM 8/16/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Hello Scott,
>
>If there is a big overhead involved (as what I can understand), will it be
>worth locking domain names except in the case of disputes and big financial
>mess.
>For example a person frauds me for $10. And the locking expense be $5 or
>whatsoever. So I am spending $15 on a domain which does not belong to me and
>just to make sure that this guy does not register it from somewhere else.
>
>I think it will be better to give the RSP the right for the domain name. But
>how ? needs to be worked out.
>
>Just a thought. I might be wrong.
>
>Abhishek Rungta
>Indus Net Technologies
>Phone : 91-33-2201718 2210896
>http://www.talash.net
>! Outsource your web development to us !
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Scott Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 2:31 PM
>Subject: Re: Lockdowns coming?
>
>
> > This is definitely coming.
> >
> > I would like to take an informal poll...
> >
> > Now, I know that this may be hard to objectively comment on, but please
> > try. :) We will look at this more formally before releasing it, but to
> > satisfy my curiosity:
> >
> > This (locking a name) is something that most people in the industry charge
> > for, generally quite a reasonable fee. There is an admin overhead in
> > dealing with the unlocking of names as necessary (after they have been
> > locked, some sort or paper/legal trust system would need to be in place to
> > handle this). Since we would manage that part (likely), how would you feel
> > we should charge for this? How much?
> >
> > Thanks -
> >
> > sA
> >
> > At 08:45 AM 8/16/00 -0400, you wrote:
> > >I would like to assure all Resellers that we will never do anything
> > >"similar to
> > >NSI" :)
> > >
> > >We do have to power to lock down domains. Currently, we use it only for
> > >ownership and payment disputes.
> > >
> > >We are working on a system to extend this as an option for all domains.
>(Scott
> > >Allen has talked about this, search the archives if you're interested.)
> > >
> > >hope this helps
> > >
> > >On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, ross wrote: > ie. maybe similar to NSI's locked
> > >system where you can't make any changes > without a fax or some other
> > >authorization? to ensure that even if someone > got the l/p they couldn't
>do
> > >any damage to your domains.... >
> > > > ..ross
> > > > 00x75,0x75,0x6e,0x65,0x74
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Charles Daminato wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Currently our security model works like this:
> > > > >
> > > > > QuickStart - username/password under SSL
> > > > >
> > > > > FullAccess - IP ACL, username MATCHED to IP in ACL, Crypt key
> > > > >
> > > > > What sort of lockdown mechanism do you propose?
> > > > >
> > > > > Charles Daminato
> > > > > OpenSRS Support Manager
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Swerve wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey opensrs gang,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When will the previously talked about lockdown mechanism be
>coming?
> > > > > > (as in another layer of security, (on top of passwords) to prevent
> > > hanky
> > > > > > panky.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Swerve
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >--
> > >Robert Rivers
> > >OpenSRS Technical Operations
> > >(416) 535-0123 x1307
> >
> > Scott Allan
> > Director OpenSRS
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
Scott Allan
Director OpenSRS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
