Transcom.uk EPP create limits / Army tagger's - Nominets answer

[aquanuke]

It's an interesting setup now, throwing some calculations and math into your scripts you can pinpoint an exact time accounting for response so as to drop a single create. This works well on low contended but higher contended names have a latency spike which is hard to measure as that occurs at the exact moment of drop. There is no need to fire your load at a name which is lets face it crappy coding anyway. In all honesty would just be better if Nom limited it to one EPP request per name per TAG which would save all the resources, latency and cheating. Kinda of back to the PGP days in simplicity. After all what is the point of having 1000 bad requests limit per day if not just to appease the drop catching community, no purpose other than being resource hungry.

 

[Transcom ISP]

agreed, just limit the writes.. all fair game then..

 

[Transcom ISP]

Ineteresting from nominet on latency spikes...

Hi Bill,


I can assure you that our systems are able to handle the number of commands we’re receiving at a time. The latency of our systems processing time doesn’t have an impact, as long as your commands are as concise as possible, they’ll be handled in the same amount of time – as the system works, it’s whichever command lands on our server first which will catch the domain


Kind regards


Gary MacGregor-Manzi (he/him)
Technical Support Analyst

 

[aquanuke]

Im calculating/adjusting the latency in one thousandth of a ms. Im not saying its a problem, Im saying you need to vary your latency depending on the contention

 

[aquanuke]

I would love to know how John Sisk is managing to be there first almost every time.

Just ask him, nice guy been around forever

 

[Transcom ISP]

Im calculating/adjusting the latency in one thousandth of a ms. Im not saying its a problem, Im saying you need to vary your latency depending on the contention

yep, were all in microseconds, our reach to the epp is very fast but it does vary + / - 200 us on every check, the same on any one connecting from anywhare

 

[rob]

If you haven't seen it there is an interesting post on https://community.nominet.uk/t/new-domain-expiry-process-and-droplists-for-uk/673/171? - although wasnt that a tactic from early 2000s?!

 

[Paullas]

Smoke and Mirrors come to mind

 

[super-whois]

after the catch though?

I'm not sure if best.uk.catch.software was set in the create request (no update time on RDAP/Whois), although I could be wrong. Clearly false advertising though!

 

[ukbackorder]

Lol I have never set nameservers at catch. I guess it's my turn in the barrel for you now is it?

 

[super-whois]

I have never set nameservers

I thought I was misremembering, but I have seen someone setting nameservers which must have been in the create request.

 

[ukbackorder]

Not me. I wish nameservers were the only problem. Still it's only a matter of time before the rest of us catch up to Denys and Davies.

 

[super-whois]

Still it's only a matter of time before the rest of us catch up to Denys and Davies.

I'm still trying to keep up with the Joneses though!