[95750] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: On-going Internet Emergency and Domain Names
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gadi Evron)
Tue Apr 3 07:10:33 2007
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 06:01:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au>
Cc: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20070403064536.GB2462@skywalker.creative.net.au>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Tue, 3 Apr 2007, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2007, Tony Finch wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, David Conrad wrote:
> > >
> > > Even if a delay were imposed, I'm not sure I see how this would actually help
> > > as I would assume it would require folks to actually look at the list of newly
> > > created domains and discriminate between the ones that were created for good
> > > and the ones created for ill. How would one do this?
> >
> > A good start would be to forbid the delegation of newly-registered
> > domains that have not yet been paid for.
>
> Define paid for. Paid for == bank said yes, or Paid for == bank said yes and then
> said "Whoa no; thats not really right."
>
> (I truely wonder what the domain registrars are seeing as CC transaction failure
> rates, and why the banks haven't stepped in.)
The banks don't lose enough money to warrant action, at least action
specific to these registrars.
TWC (Transaction Without Card) is something banks lose billions of USD
every year on. In most cases though, they are able to respond accordingly
and then the registrar (not the victim user or the bank) are the ones
losing money. Further action would mean further loss.
Gadi.
>
>
> Adrian
>
