Hi Scott,
Thanks for your reply...
Scott Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >Just to clarify - I presume that these messages will be coming
> >from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"?
>
> No - the "reply-to" for these messages would be set by the RSP.
>
But the From: headers will say $[EMAIL PROTECTED], yes? Sorry if I'm being
obtuse - I'm an RSP who likes to hide his OpenSRS affiliation as much as
possible, because I live in a country filled with unscrupulous b*stards.
Unscrupulous b*stards who would sell far more domains than me, purely because
of their... ummm... unscrupulousity... :) I don't like the idea of that, so I
just want to make sure what we're talking about...
> >Pardon my ignorace, but I don't understand the "per name" bit.
>
> It means that they would have to change it for each name if they wanted to
> change it.
>
Ah, per *domain* name! Pay attention Adam! Sorry Scott! :)
> Right - There is only so far we can go in protecting the registrant, yet
> empowering the RSP. I feel the current spec gets the balance right. It
> would take a pretty patient and savvy RSP to nab a name by exploiting this
> process. Not to mention the fact that as soon as the registrant contacted
> us, we would see that the RSP turned off notification, and well...
>
Well, it's not so much RSP's nabbing domain names as RSP's not doing their
job properly and informing the registrant. Of course, both types should be
taken outside and shot - and I hope I'll never be seen as either - but we
really shouldn't forget about the registrants. We were all registrants at one
stage. And they're our bread and butter - we should look after them.
adam
