Gentlemen,
The bottom line on this issue is that OpenSRS will not allow RSP's
unfettered access to the Registration data, which presents the RSP with a
service problem. This issue has been beaten to death here and many have
stated reasons why the RSP should have access and OpenSRS has consistently
stated their position of not allowing it.
Even, today, NetSol, allows access to the Tech Contact and other Registrars
allow the RSP full access, as well.
So with respect to OpenSRS, the options are: (1) shut up and live with it;
or, (2) register domains with a Registrar which allows the RSP access, so
they can service their customers.
We are a hosting provider and we live in a competitive environment, with an
expectation of even more competition. We have fairly competitive pricing,
but that is not our discriminator. When a customer calls they reach a live
voice over 99% of the time. Our discriminator is service.
With all the great things OpenSRS has going for itself, this is a difficult
issue for us -- maybe it's no big deal to others. We must be in a position
to service our customer -- many of which can't spell "DNS".
We understand that OpenSRS has to do what they believe is in their best
interest and we have to do the same. It is, however, unfortunate that
there has not been a compromise, a bending or even an issue taken to ICANN.
We are small in comparison, but we have a very low churn rate. Many of our
customers think we walk on water and we're not going to let a something as
simple as a domain name registration dissolution them.
Thanks,
At 05:39 PM 6/28/01 -0700, you wrote:
>Hello William,
>
>Thursday, June 28, 2001, 4:59:15 PM, William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> > No, I just have a hard time keeping your changing stories straight.
>
> > For example:
> >> We use BulkRegister.com, enom.com and OpenSRS.org to
> >> register new domain names. We have all three on our web
> >> site and allow our clients to use whom ever they chose. We
> >> have an FAQ on site that discusses the companies, their
> >> weakness and strengths from the client view point.
>
> > Yet, previously you have said:
> > http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0012/0452.html
> > "I did not say that you should register your domains with Tucows, in
> > fact I have made it clear in previous messages that we no longer use
> > them ourselves, but for reasons other than pricing."
>
> > You've said it also in at least 5 other messages more recent than that
> > one as well, when you've been harping on this same issue.
>
> > Now you say you do still register names through them.
>
> > Frankly, I wish you would just make up your mind.
>
> > Or keep your stories straight.
>
>For example:
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0012/0304.html
>"Fortunately we now use a Registrar that does allow us to do this. One of
>three Registrars that I am aware of that allows this practice. There are
>probably more than three, I haven't reviewed the policy of everyone out
>there.
>"We haven't registered any new domains with OpenSRS since May, so we should
>not have any remaining liability from domains registered with OpenSRS, as
>most banks restrict charge backs to two months, a few to six months.
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0012/0204.html
>"This attitude is why we now register all our new domains with another
>Registrar and plan on moving the domains we have with OpenSRS to this other
>Registrar as the current registration expires."
>
>
>WXW: If this was true, and you were only using OpenSRS until your
>customers' renewals, then why are you still here, since all of them
>would have renewed by now?
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0011/0866.html
>"We currently only use OpenSRS for transfers, not new domain name
>registrations for this very reason. We would prefer to use OpenSRS for
>everything, but can not take the risks as long as their policies remain so
>unfavorable to RSPs concerning charge back issues."
>
>WXW: Odd, you claimed you weren't using OpenSRS at all, waiting until
>renewals to move them to your magical new registrar, and here you say
>you use OpenSRS for transfers. See what I mean? It's hard to
>separate fact from fiction when reading your posts.
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0104/0647.html
>"We have switched all our new registrations to the Registrar
>that treats us with respect, not distrust. All transfer
>requests also go to this other Registrar if the client is
>willing."
>"We're small, as domain name registration is not our primary
>business and we do not actively seek domain name
>registration business. We only register 8-10 new domains
>each day, so our leaving will not put OpenSRS out of
>business. We realize that"
>
>WXW: Strange, previously you had claimed to have over a thousand domains at
>OpenSRS. This doesn't jive with your dates you claimed you stop using
>them (or with your other previous volume claims).
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0105/0225.html
>"We still have over a thousand clients with OpenSRS, so it's
>continuing stability is important to us. We would prefer to
>have all our clients with one Registrar, as it would make it
>easier for us to manage. We are offering incentives to our
>clients to move their domains from OpenSRS so eventually we
>will have moved them all as their domains renew. Since many
>initially signed on for multiple years, it will take time."
>"We would have preferred to stay with OpenSRS. It would have
>been easier for us to do so than convince all our clients to
>move their domains to another registrar. And we would have
>made more money in the process, as we are not making
>anything on the domains that we are moving. But the issue
>of charge backs is just to important to ignore."
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0104/0623.html
>"We provide domain name registration free to our hosting clients, no charge.
>That's zero dollars, we pay the fee ourselves if the client is willing to
>transfer it to the registrar that we use. Which is not OpenSRS."
>"We still have clients using OpenSRS, which is why we monitor their lists.
>They pay the fee as they do not use to transfer the domain name to our
>registrar. Which is xxxx(removed as not being appropriate for this list),
>the amount our CPA tells us it takes to cover our costs of providing the
>service."
>"And I do not use my name because my opinions stated are my own, not those of
>my company. I prefer to keep the two separate."
>
>WXW: Or to prevent people from verifying your claims and holding you
>responsible for your statements.
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0012/0251.html
>"This doesn't really have much of an impact on us anymore, as we have
>switched to a Registrar that protects our interests in the case of charge
>backs. The only reason we monitor this list is that we still have a large
>number of clients registered with Tucows."
>
>http://www.opensrs.org/archives/discuss-list/0012/0224.html
>"Since we no longer use OpenSRS for new domain registrations, we are not
>having as many problems with charge backs. The customer quickly "remembers"
>the transaction when we disable the domain name on them."
>
>WXW: Shall I go on?
>
>--
>Best regards,
>William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Userfriendly.com Domains
>The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
>DNS Services from $1.65/mo
----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
----
