The new Real Time DAC

[foz]

I just replied to the email notice "Changes to the domain availability checker (DAC)", I received acknowledgement by a representative of the Member and Registrar Services that it would forwarded as "feedback".

Who would read this "feedback"?

 

[Paullas]

That is for formal complaints - I would suggest a first step of raising concerns on nom-steer and the like.

nomsteer is crap all you get is hundreds of emails about the same thing.

 

[bb99]

That is for formal complaints - I would suggest a first step of raising concerns on nom-steer and the like.

Likewise, to be more proactive and useful point out what a reasonable solution would be rather than just saying 'its wrong'

If registrars feel strongly, surely they should cover all bases (ie feedback, complaints and the PAB feedback) so as to ensure that their voice is heard!

 

[grantw]

That is for formal complaints - I would suggest a first step of raising concerns on nom-steer and the like.

Likewise, to be more proactive and useful point out what a reasonable solution would be rather than just saying 'its wrong'

Posting on nom-steer seems pointless to me Rob, I really cannot be bothered getting into a debate with a load of people that seem to thoroughly enjoy arguing that black is white.

Reasonable solution to what? Dropcatching, list building, publishing whois details, distributing drop lists......?? It's totally unknown why the changes have been made and I don't see the point in speculating the reasons. If Nominet choose to explain their reasoning then I guess we could all suggest solutions to whatever issue they have, but all we have at the moment is some major contract changes that could put a load of people out of business.


Grant

 

[bb99]

Posting on nom-steer seems pointless to me Rob, I really cannot be bothered getting into a debate with a load of people that seem to thoroughly enjoy arguing that black is white.

There has already been some comment against the new T&Cs on Nom-Steer with one poster describing the changes as "abhorrent".

I'd say that they were "repugnant". I'm not sure which is worse

I don't think there's been any condemnation of the loss of the "suspended" flag in the real time DAC though which, as I said a while ago, is my big beef

If everyone sends their concerns as feedback, it could be said "there's been some feedback but no complaints". If everyone sends a formal complaint, and it's raised at the next PAB meeting, the PAB may say "we can't really discuss this because it has been the subject of formal complaints and we can't interfere with that complaints process".

So I think I'll be sending my views as Nominet feedback, a Nominet complaint and PAB feedback.

Before I go and make my lunch, does anyone know if Nominet have made a test server for the new (real time) DAC available? Whilst I appreciate the change in responses is not huge, it would be good to be able to test things in advance of the April changeover. I ask the question having already looked on the Nom site for details of a test server and not having found any.

 

[rob]

nomsteer is crap all you get is hundreds of emails about the same thing.

I am guessing you are unsubscribed Its a two way street, you cant complain while opting out of the feedback process even if it can be an uphill battle at times.

Posting on nom-steer seems pointless to me Rob, I really cannot be bothered getting into a debate with a load of people that seem to thoroughly enjoy arguing that black is white.

Agreed - alot is tosh on there and same old same old from the same faces. What I have found is that when non-regulars stick their head over the parapet it carries abit more weight

Reasonable solution to what? Dropcatching, list building, publishing whois details, distributing drop lists......?? It's totally unknown why the changes have been made and I don't see the point in speculating the reasons. If Nominet choose to explain their reasoning then I guess we could all suggest solutions to whatever issue they have, but all we have at the moment is some major contract changes that could put a load of people out of business.

As per the PAB paper it seems this is in response to larger registrars wanting an increase in quota as they have large userbases. Similarly Nominet are closing loopholes for those who republish 'their data'.

What I meant was how do you close the loopholes allowing people to basically mine the zonefile (for dubious purposes), allow the bigger registrars more lookups due to their increased 'need' , while keeping the FCFS system of registering deleted names a level playing field.

If everyone sends their concerns as feedback, it could be said "there's been some feedback but no complaints". If everyone sends a formal complaint, and it's raised at the next PAB meeting, the PAB may say "we can't really discuss this because it has been the subject of formal complaints and we can't interfere with that complaints process".

Aye - very tricky thus the nom-steer and other routes options rather than starting several formal complaints. This is still yet to be inacted so if nominet can be made aware of the impractical nature to some members of the changes, it may be possible to make the changes more workable for everyone

 

[Paullas]

I am guessing you are unsubscribed Its a two way street, you cant complain while opting out of the feedback process even if it can be an uphill battle at times.

it is the amount of crap emails that come through is why i unsubscribed, if they had a better solution then i would re apply but for the moment ill stay of that platform.

 

[foz]

What I meant was how do you close the loopholes allowing people to basically mine the zonefile (for dubious purposes), allow the bigger registrars more lookups due to their increased 'need' , while keeping the FCFS system of registering deleted names a level playing field.

I thought it was obvious, leave the new DAC announcements in place and get Nominet to publish "suspended" domains.

 

[retired_member6]

Why remove the suspend flag though? it uses up resources? all I see is actions to stop drop catching, unless it really is a drain on their £8 million profitable servers.

 

[rob]

I thought it was obvious, leave the new DAC announcements in place and get Nominet to publish "suspended" domains.

Droplist providers then go out of business and lose rev stream, Nominet is then directly 'competing' with membership. Slippery slope arguement kicks in....

/devils advocate

 

[foz]

Droplist providers then go out of business and lose rev stream, Nominet is then directly 'competing' with membership. Slippery slope arguement kicks in....

/devils advocate

My understanding is that "others" shouldn't be selling this data anyway. Would hardly think drop list distribution and sales is big $$$.

 

[bb99]

Why remove the suspend flag though? it uses up resources?

Ironically, the removal of the suspended flag from the real time DAC requires registrants to store more registry data in order to maintain the same functionality from the real time DAC*... And yet it's the storage of registry data by registrars that the revised T&Cs are trying to reduce.


* this is a generalisation - I guess it depends on what you do with your DAC data and how you do it.

 

[rob]

Why remove the suspend flag though? it uses up resources? all I see is actions to stop drop catching, unless it really is a drain on their £8 million profitable servers.

Removal of the suspended flag only hinders a very small number of drops, in theory this can be coded around as per other changes in the past. If this makes no sense, then you are not chasing those domains

The live DAC will for the purposes of catching not change, you check a name, if its free you can reg it, if its not, you query again in a few miliseconds.

The changes on the rules of data retention and list scanning would be more problematic for catchers as without that info it you dont know what or when to target.

My understanding is that "others" shouldn't be selling this data anyway. Would hardly think drop list distribution and sales is big $$$.

I will let a list provider argue the toss on that one - but yes, in theory the data should not be displayed or sold

Nominet have been quite er, fierce (?) , in one case to close a site down - these terms now make that process much easier without having to go around the houses in debating what is insubstantial.

With Nominet publishing the suspended / pending delete names would that increase dropcatching competition as more people would be aware of what goes on a daily basis?

Careful what you wish for...

 

[GreyWing]

If they did that Rob and published lists which I think they will do now, will they then move to some kind of standard catching interface where it is completely random.

Thus cancelling out scripts and servers from being preferential in catching.

Maybe then they will bring in something like only x catches per month?

 

[foz]

Nominet have been quite er, fierce (?) , in one case to close a site down - these terms now make that process much easier without having to go around the houses in debating what is insubstantial.

With Nominet publishing the suspended / pending delete names would that increase dropcatching competition as more people would be aware of what goes on a daily basis?

Careful what you wish for...

Yes and I thought that was due to Nominet's thoughts that distributing such data contravened the first come first served registration policy?

Whereas if Nominet were the distribution point of such data it would provide a open level playing field. A lot of other Registry's circulate "quarantine" and "pending release" domain names to their members.

If more competition comes into play, so be it. The amount of new TAG's appearing of late has been prolific anyway.

 

[rob]

If they did that Rob and published lists which I think they will do now, will they then move to some kind of standard catching interface where it is completely random.

Thus cancelling out scripts and servers from being preferential in catching.

Maybe then they will bring in something like only x catches per month?

Wait list, domain auctions from Nom?

Yes and I thought that was due to Nominet's thoughts that distributing such data contravened the first come first served registration policy?

FCFS reg and protecting their IP rights in the zone are different issues as far as I can see. The latter is important when they go after spammers, or others who break the terms and conditions. You cant expect Nominet to have teeth and shut down people who cache and display .uk data such as domaintools.com while allowing every member the capacity to copy the zone ;-)

Whereas if Nominet were the distribution point of such data it would provide a open level playing field. A lot of other Registry's circulate "quarantine" and "pending release" domain names to their members.

If more competition comes into play, so be it. The amount of new TAG's appearing of late has been prolific anyway.

Conversely the increase in awareness of dropcatching could go the other way and increase the unease that does exist in some quarters that a quite small benefit is being collected by a small group.

In the context of the governence review that is ongoing, this would neatly fit the 'domainers' trying to exert control over Nominet for their own benefit rather than wider interests complaint that has been aired.

 

[retired_member12]

Before the changes:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE.....••....................|...........................EVERYONE ELSE


After the changes:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE....................••.....|...........................EVERYONE ELSE


Nominet's objective to serve the wider community:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE............................|.....................••...EVERYONE ELSE

 

[retired_member6]

Before the changes:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE.....••....................|...........................EVERYONE ELSE


After the changes:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE....................••.....|...........................EVERYONE ELSE


Nominet's objective to serve the wider community:

MEMBERS ADVANTAGE............................|.....................••...EVERYONE ELSE

No members, no PAB, board goes free.

 

[retired_member12]

No members, no PAB, board goes free.

Just like New Labour and the Unions, Nominet focus is shifting, they don't want to be seen as serving just its membership. To a point, that's fine. How you take that is a different matter!

 

[GreyWing]

Sorry guys but I have a site dedicated to the privateers taking over Nominet for their own good.

It was written over a month ago before this every came to light.

Ebout.co.uk

In my view it's the first stealth step in taking control from Members, they tried and failed last year.

You do have a choice, I believe Andrew is still running a list for a vote of no confidence and trying to get support for an EGM.