Re: EPP host renames

I'm not sure why you are solving a dispute between two registrars.

Currently registrar a contacts registrar b and complains. Registrar b disassociates the host object regardless of the fact the registrant went silent. Why? Because in all likelihood it's the same registrant behind both domains at two different registrars and they are ultimately responsible for managing their domains. If its actually two separate registrants with no relation, then registrar b has absolutely no reason not to remove the association.

This comes down to registrars and registrants doing their part as well AND well constructed RRAs in all parties joint interests.

Michael Young

M:647-289-1220

On 2012-12-19, at 13:55, Francisco Obispo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Consider the following:
> 
> test.TLD -> sponsored by registrar_a
> example.TLD -> sponsored by registrar_b
> 
> test.TLD
>  ns: ns1.example.tld
>  ns: ns2.example.tld
> 
> example.TLD
>  ns: ns1.test.tld
>  ns: ns2.test.tld
> 
> 
> 
> registrar_a wants to delete test.TLD, issues a delete command for ns1 and ns2.test.TLD and it fails because of object associations.
> 
> the registrant has disappeared and registrar_a no longer has a way to charge him for the renewal
> 
> registrar_b cannot proceed with the change because the registrant of example.TLD is not responding to emails
> 
> The auto-renew proceeds in the registry, and charges the registrar for the operation.
> 
> So technically this can go on and on for a while, unless there's registry policy around it:
> 
> - We will allow the delete command, put it in a pending state for 5 days,
> - if in 5 days the domains using the host are not updated we proceed with 
>  the delete.
> 
> 
> Any other thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 19, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Seth Goldman <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Ah right, of course.
>> 
>> Isn't a hole in the EPP spec then? Another registrar can effectively hold your domain hostage and prevent its deletion by adding a reference to one of its subordinate hosts.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Francisco Obispo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> well if another registrar is referencing the host you created, you're not supposed to allow the update:
>> 
>>> From RFC5732:
>> 
>>   Host name changes can have an impact on associated objects that refer
>>   to the host object.  A host name change SHOULD NOT require additional
>>   updates of associated objects to preserve existing associations, with
>>   one exception: changing an external host object that has associations
>>   with objects that are sponsored by a different client.  Attempts to
>>   update such hosts directly MUST fail with EPP error code 2305.  The
>>   change can be provisioned by creating a new external host with a new
>>   name and any needed new attributes, and subsequently updating the
>>   other objects sponsored by the client.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Dec 19, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Seth Goldman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I see. You're saying that the host object rename lets you work around the scenario where another registrar has a reference to one of your subordinate host objects. Otherwise, you're stuck in a scenario where you can't delete the domain until that other registrar removes its reference. Fair point, there's clearly no workaround for that.
>> 
>> Francisco Obispo
>> Director of Applications and Services - ISC
>> email: [email protected]
>> Phone: +1 650 423 1374 || INOC-DBA *3557* NOC
>> PGP KeyID = B38DB1BE
> 
> Francisco Obispo 
> Director of Applications and Services - ISC
> email: [email protected]
> Phone: +1 650 423 1374 || INOC-DBA *3557* NOC
> PGP KeyID = B38DB1BE
> 
> _______________________________________________
> provreg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg