Jens Wagner wrote:
Larry Erlich schrieb:
Marcus Faure wrote:
As long as we do not have standardized whois output, a thin model is more difficult to deal with. I also think that the per-registrar thin model that Bruce proposed will cause this extra work, and honestly I do not believe that the average user understands it.
Can you explain what you mean by "honestly I do not believe that the average user understands it"?
What happened during the .ORG Transition? Didn't you receive many customer inquiries regarding the WHOIS? We sure did, as our customers were confused. We need to think more for the customer and to the benefit of the registrant himself instead of solely the registrar.
The confusion beneath the registrants was exactlly due to the thick+thin-whois! There were a lot of problems regarding registrar transfers due to one registrar being "thin" and the other "thick", which resulted in more support --> higher costs!
We didn't have that issue but I now understand your point.
A registration service provider can be handled with an optional maintainer field in the whois. We have one on the CORE whois that defaults to the member number, but can also contain a URL.
How are you going to translate the "optional maintainer field" in the registry whois output so that a registrant can understand who the reseller is? Are you going to ask the registry to lookup and display 2-3 lines of human readable information? And that they will agree to even make modification to add this field?
This should be proposed as an EPP extension anyway. At least one line of text per domain name should be usable for such purposes.
There would have to be at least two lines of text per domain. One for the registrar with full contact information and one for the reseller. But I am still in favor of a thin model. Keep in mind that our whole system is setup as a thick model and I would rather not have to have the expense of re-writing our whole system to accomodate this change. I don't think you can assume that this is trivial for many registrars. This will be expensive.
Will you also have the registry (if thick model) display the registrar in a human readable format? Or does the registrant have to do a further search with a code to find out, for example, who registrar "R33-LROR" is?
This is up to the registry. However there should be a webinterface that shows all informations 'pretty-printed'.
Doesn't handle the situation where another entity wants to query port 43 to display the information without creating their own routine to "pretty-print" the info. In other words it will only be nicely human readable if viewed through the registry web interface but not through another entities web interface. Larry Erlich http://www.DomainRegistry.com
Best regards,
Jens Wagner CTO Key-Systems GmbH
Key-Systems GmbH Prager Ring 4-12 66482 Zweibrücken Tel.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 50 Fax.: +49 (0) 6332 - 79 18 51 Email: support@rrpproxy.net
www.key-systems.net www.domaindiscount24.com www.RRPproxy.net www.Key-Fashion.de
Larry Erlich
Yours, Marcus
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc. 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com -----------------------------------------------------------------