Reliable Bulk Availability Check With OV Req.

[retired_member6]

Well I said that to APD but I think he's right enough. I've been using the excellent set up on offer by opposite to run through whois and overture.

http://www.opposite.com/whois.cgi
http://www.opposite.com/whois2.cgi

On occasions it reaches its 1000 limit which leaves me plodding along entering in one at a time and someone with my need for speed gets very very bored and annoyed haha. I thought there might be a way to pass the request through my IP address as the requesting IP but obviously not and I'd have to host it, which is something I'm following up on.

 

[retired member 1]

I would love to know why you think that no address data is a drawback? The primary reason we find that people want to harvest large sets of address data is for invoicing scams, which is why it is not on the DAC. However when we get reasonable requests to extend the output (such as adding the tag) then we do respond.



Some other downsides as well:
- if they use whois2 then we know the originating IP address and so nothing is gained.
- if they use whois then they are limited to 1,000 and soon get blocked. The operators generally take action to prevent them being abused.



Some people use a large IP address allocation, even as much as a whole /19, to try and bypass the limits. We do catch them and then block them for a long period of time.



Absolutely, so pay up the measly £25 and use the DAC. I'm still confused as to why so many people don't want to go that way. If you can explain it then please take the time.

Jay, I am already a TAG holder and Member so I have paid up the £25, although you fail to mention the membership costs involved.

Not everyone using the whois does so to use invoicing scams.

The fact of the matter is most domaining software and databases work on WHOIS and not on the DAC, 1000 is a useless limit for this task.

 

[Jay Daley]

Not everyone using the whois does so to use invoicing scams.

Absolutely, but no automated system can tell the difference between good use and bad. However with the DAC, since it does not give out address and registrant data, we do not have a problem.

The fact of the matter is most domaining software and databases work on WHOIS and not on the DAC, 1000 is a useless limit for this task.

Most domaining software sends a domain name to a port on a server and gets a response which is parses to obtain the result from. The DAC also receives a domain name, so no problem there. The DAC works on a different port, so you need software that can specify the port. Every WHOIS server in the world has a different output so almost all the domaining software can be configured to read DAC output.

 

[retired member 1]

Absolutely, but no automated system can tell the difference between good use and bad. However with the DAC, since it does not give out address and registrant data, we do not have a problem.



Most domaining software sends a domain name to a port on a server and gets a response which is parses to obtain the result from. The DAC also receives a domain name, so no problem there. The DAC works on a different port, so you need software that can specify the port. Every WHOIS server in the world has a different output so almost all the domaining software can be configured to read DAC output.

In my personal opinion, the 1000 limit on WHOIS is useless, you are entitled to your own.

The £25 arguement to use the DAC doesn't stand up as it's really £525 + Vat , the only people Nominet are hurting by imposing WHOIS limits is themselves.

Joe average newbie isn't going to stump up over £500 to mass query availability of domains.

 

[rob]

Just for arguements sake bear in mind Nominet are not oblidged to ensure that a newbie domainer has the ability to check a pile of domains

The main problem here is that domain products are based around traditional 'scraping' of whois output, and a dedicated bulk checker for the DAC is required to be built ... which costs money... however then barriers to entry could be £500 (Tag/Membership) , £25 (Dac) , £250 (Bulk DAC checker license)... then spending cash

 

[retired member 1]

Just for arguements sake bear in mind Nominet are not oblidged to ensure that a newbie domainer has the ability to check a pile of domains

The main problem here is that domain products are based around traditional 'scraping' of whois output, and a dedicated bulk checker for the DAC is required to be built ... which costs money... however then barriers to entry could be £500 (Tag/Membership) , £25 (Dac) , £250 (Bulk DAC checker license)... then spending cash

I realise this, but i'm sat here wondering what % of domains registered each day are done so by "domainers" (New and Old).

It just seems like Nominet are making things harder for us, if the problem is as quoted above, then why not release a public facing tool which allows any user to check the availability only of a domain, this tool could still have limits per rolling min but with a higher per rolling 24 period.

By making things harder or more expensive surely they are just hurting their own customers.

 

[jonno]

Jay, wouldnt it be an idea for nominet to incorporate what eurid has? Basically you enter a domain and it gives you the basic info (e.g the same data as dac - no address) but to find out further details they have to complete a CAPATCHA?

In theory it wouldn't be very hard for you to implement too - you can base the first section on the dac for example.

You could even provide both services - normal whois with 1000 limit (for accessability purposes) AND this new method (with a higher limit) as well.

 

[retired_member26]

""Registrant - On the drop, you'll know who got the name if you didn't. However the tag is likely to be good enough in most situations and that is being added to the DAC.""

Why I need the TAG info on DAC response format? DAC is for catching domains names and there are a few domains worth to chase a day so if you want to see who got what just use WHOIS.

I do not agree with you. Please do not change the format of the DAC since everytime Nominet changed something I have to adjust or made adjusted the script which costs money to me or others.

Just increase the WHOIS quota up to 5K per day and everbody will be fine. I am personally ready to pay required amount for this increase.

TurNIC

 

[fred]

... DAC is for catching domains names...

Not strictly true.

The DAC (from The Nominet website) "enables you to make high volumes of queries about the availability of domain names."

ONE use of this is for catching domains. The TAG is being added on for the benefit of other Members who use it for different reasons.

 

[retired_member26]

Not strictly true.

The DAC (from The Nominet website) "enables you to make high volumes of queries about the availability of domain names."

ONE use of this is for catching domains. The TAG is being added on for the benefit of other Members who use it for different reasons.

So ? Just tell me whether you sift through suspended domains names via DAC with existing format or not? Yes. Then why there is a need to change the DAC response format.

 

[fred]

So ? Just tell me whether you sift through suspended domains names via DAC with existing format or not?.

Yes I do. Does the change make any difference to this? No - I've already made the one tiny change to my script to make sure it doesn't cause any problems.

Then why there is a need to change the DAC response format.

As I said in my last post, other members/Tag holders use the dac for other reasons. If you subscribe to nom-steer you will have seen the discusions about these reasons.

 

[Jay Daley]

Jay, wouldnt it be an idea for nominet to incorporate what eurid has? Basically you enter a domain and it gives you the basic info (e.g the same data as dac - no address) but to find out further details they have to complete a CAPATCHA?

In theory it wouldn't be very hard for you to implement too - you can base the first section on the dac for example.

You could even provide both services - normal whois with 1000 limit (for accessability purposes) AND this new method (with a higher limit) as well.

The reason we don't user CAPTCHAs is for accessibilty reasons. I don't think your suggestion of split limits would be acceptable either, since it effectively discriminates against those who can't use CAPTCHAs.

The other reason of course is that we are happy for automated tools to use WHOIS, even though we don't support it by the way we issue updates, provided they stick within limits.

BTW I reserve the right to completely change my mind on this one at a later date.

 

[jonno]

Thanks for the explanation Jay.

 

[Brassneck]

Well I said that to APD but I think he's right enough. I've been using the excellent set up on offer by opposite to run through whois and overture.

http://www.opposite.com/whois.cgi
http://www.opposite.com/whois2.cgi

These seem to have been down for a couple of days? Anybody know of any alternatives, particularly web-based bulk whois checks?

Thanks
Stephen.

 

[BFTUK]

Well I said that to APD but I think he's right enough. I've been using the excellent set up on offer by opposite to run through whois and overture.

http://www.opposite.com/whois.cgi
http://www.opposite.com/whois2.cgi

These seem to have been down for a couple of days? Anybody know of any alternatives, particularly web-based bulk whois checks?

Thanks
Stephen.

These tools are indeed excellent, i did speak to APD a while ago about the possibility of buying the script to add to my site, but at the time he was too busy to do anything.

Hopefully he'll get these back up soon!

 

[retired_member27]

Sorry, I didn't realise that I had accidently deleted them from the server, it's a good job I kept backups, anyway they're working again.

 

[Brassneck]

Thanks - these are really great tools!

Stephen