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