Re: Registry lock - two-factor or intervention

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <[email protected]> Wed, 18 Sep 2013 17:56:41 +0000
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.provreg
Message-ID <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F49267359@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Jacques Latour
> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 1:29 PM
> To: [email protected]; Stuart Olmstead-Wilcox
> Subject: Re: [provreg] Registry lock - two-factor or intervention

[snip]

> Should we have an industry standard way of doing registry lock? {
> registrant <--> registrar <--> registry }

I'm more than a little concerned that something that flows through the registrar can be called a *registry* lock. Locks that flow through and can be set or unset by the registrar more appropriately affect the client*Prohibited status values.

Scott
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg