Sorry, Loren, your solutions posted here and on the GA list are nothing but a step backward for this industry. Especially since ICANN has seen fit to allow a company to be both the largest registry and and the largest registrar.
To use your same justification for why the losing registrar would not impede outgoing transfers, acquiring registrars would be motivated to make sure they had proper authentication because of the risk to their accreditation. Tuesday, May 28, 2002, 8:52:58 AM, Loren Stocker wrote: > True guys, but this is overkill. > It is only because the gaining Registrar has the ungodly powers to TAKE your > domains that this lock-down becomes a norm. This lock makes you own transfers > difficult. The default is one-party consent where all it takes is for the > gaining Registrat to "fall for the scam." Do anyone think that the scams are > just going to stop happening??!! > Don't get me wrong here. Until the system is fixed -- and we have two- party > consent -- locks are the best way to protect yourself from theft. But that > forces two-party consent with hassle of a manual on-lock. My point is that we > DESERVE -- did eveyone get that -- DESERVE two-party consent where a manual > lock down is optional. Given that, if I were ebay.com I would lock it down as > well! > Best, Loren > www.evil.biz! > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > Let me say it again. Registry domain locking will automatically >> > protect your customers from these scams. >> > >> Do you mean that it would be impossible to get billing e-mail from whois? > Locking prevents the domains from being transferred if the registrant > falls for the scam... -- Best regards, William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- OpenSRS installation and customizations Payment Processing Integration Apache Installation and Support Services http://www.wxsoft.com/
