My apologies for flogging a dead horse, but I think it's important to understand the WHY of things.... (more below)
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Ross Wm. Rader wrote: > On 1/6/2004 5:03 PM James M Woods noted that: > > > It's a live sandbox, so its not meant > > to be the bomb proof environment that the LIVE system is. > > <my $0.02>Compared to how we looked at it when we first implemented it, > your current description is generous. We called it a sandbox not because > it was a self-contained environment set-off to the side where people > could test their systems but rather because we needed a place where > people could throw sand without affecting the business of selling domain > registrations...</my $0.02> that's closer to the way I remember it. IF my memory is correct, batch.opensrs.net came into being when the .com registrar implemented a "solution" to the problem of their servers getting seriously overloaded/abused during the domain deletion periods. (e.g. normal registrations would often timeout) The players in the secondary (e.g. just expired) domain market were submitting registration requests as fast as they could to try to register some of the valuable recently dropped names. Verisign's solution to the problem was to allocate a subset of their resources (e.g. each registrars connections) to a "batch" pool, and allow pretty much any behaviour inside that pool, but take serious offense to high volumes of automated requests in the main (non-batch) pool. When batch.opensrs.net was announced, I tried to get clarification about what the acceptable usage policy (AUP) was... Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:18:24 -0500 (EST) From: OpenSRS Replies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Tom Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OpenSRS Live Reseller Update October 25, 2001 Apologies Tom. I didn't get the intent of your original question. There is no AUP for the batch pool, that's the intent. Chuck D :) On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Tom Brown wrote: > On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, OpenSRS Replies wrote: > > > AUP is listed below (in the Support FAQ) - the documentation is null, it's > > there's no friggin point in having a batch pool with the _same_ AUP, so > _clearly_ the normal one doesn't apply. <snip> hhmm, and here's a clip from the oct 25th 2001 LRU that announced the batch.opensrs.net system... 2. New batch processing pool ------------------- In recent months, Verisign Registry has altered their architecture for processing domain name registrations, and more specifically, processing transactions submitted by batch programs. As a result of this, we are introducing an update to our own system architecture for OpenSRS. Please be aware of the impact this will have on any batch processes you may run against the OpenSRS system. We will be allowing access to this system Wednesday, Oct 31st 2001. The pool will open 24 hours a day, and be enabled for all the products currently offered in the regular OpenSRS system. Access to this system is not guaranteed. With the introduction of this new system, we will be heavily enforcing our AUP for all transactions and traffic pointed to the current LIVE system. You can view the AUP and intent here: -Tom ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "The Internet is a world of ends. You're at one http://BareMetal.com/ | end, and everybody and everything else are at the web hosting since '95 | other ends." - http://www.worldofends.com/
