I agree with William. Transfers already have way too much
administrative stuff attached to them, with such a huge percentage of
them failing. If the process were to become even more complicated, I'd
most likely have to raise my price, or just stop doing transfers.
Taco, I'm just curious, which registrars "require a signed transfer
agreement before processing the transfer", and I assume your talking
about transfers to the registrar? It would be interesting to know how
many registrars do not require this type of verification, and how much
market share they have combined.
Also, what would be the point of Tucows adopting new procedures, if the
"slammer" can just go to NSI, Register.com, those daddy people, or just
about anyone else, and try to transfer the domain using their
procedures? Unless your talking about RSP transfers and not transfers
from other registrars to Tucows.
ST
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William X Walsh
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 3:48 AM
To: Taco Scargo
Cc: Kirk Fletcher; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re[2]: Transfer Fraud: Who are these losers!!!!
All this would do is make transfer so hard for an RSP to implement and
automate that no one would want to do them.
Come on, think realistic here, and stop overreacting. The fact that
the domains were never at risk for actually transferring shows that
the system works the way it is supposed to.
Tuesday, Tuesday, August 14, 2001, 3:22:09 AM, Taco Scargo wrote:
> Hi Kirk,
->> Are you out of your mind?!
> No.
>> How can you possibly conclude that the (destination) RSP is
>> responsible for the fraud?!
> The RSP has an obigation to verify the identity of a customer. I don't
know
> about you but I request some kind of proof that the person contacting
me is
> indeed the person and is employed by a certain company.
>> If an RSP receives a transfer
>> request and it seems legit they approve it
> So the RSP should check if it is legit, you say it yourself !
>> Some people can submit dodgy transfer requests, but
>> to penalise the RSP for that is just plain stupid.
> You can only penalise the RSP if there are rules in place where the
RSP is
> supposed to do some checking of the identity of the customer.
>> Obviously if there's any hint that the RSP themselves are
>> involved in fraud then action should be taken - but simply
>> receiving a dodgy transfer request doesn't make them bad
>> apples by any stretch of the imagination.
> I haven't said anyone is a bad apple, Tucows should however be
carefull that
> not all RSPs will be viewed as bad apples, just because a few of them
are.
> Therefore I plea for some additions to the RSP agreement to
'encourage' the
> RSP to do some checking.
>> I don't think you've thought it through.
> I have.
> Taco
--
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
