on 9/2/2000 4:22 PM, Dave Warren at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My view on transfers is a little different then what I've seen so far here.
>
> I can see three transfer possibilities
> A) External to RSP
> B) RSP to RSP
> C) RSP to external.
>
> External can be NetSol, or anyone else, I don't really know or care.
>
> From my point of view, the user shouldn't have to know or care that the
> losing registrar/RSP was and OpenSRS RSP, or NetSol, or anyone else, the
> process should be just a smooth. That's why we have/use resellers, we don't
> need the average user to even know what Tucows or OpenSRS is.
>
> From the end user's point of view, it must be as simple as a (A) transfer to
> complete a (B) transfer. I've only done one from NetSol, and it went very
> very smoothly, just a single confirmation email, then a single follow-up
> from NetSol telling me they authorized the transfer.
>
> I don't see any reason that the policies should be any different, give the
> losing RSP 5 days to block it, otherwise just put it through, same as a
> registrar->registrar transfer.
>
> I know and understand that underneath, OpenSRS isn't quite ready to "just
> transfer" a domain, but that will come I assume. I'm more interested in the
> RSP point of view, and even more so, the end user's point of view.
>
>
> The last issue, which is quite different, is (C). In this case, is the RSP
> given the chance to block it the same way a "real" registrar would? Is the
> RSP notified at all?
>
>
>
i dont agree with the allowing a transfer without the approval of the losing
RSP, i firmly believe the losing rsp should have control over this and
opensrs and tucows shouldnt have last word. There could be other issues
involved with the transfer and an approval from the losing rsp helps protect
them.
