[sf-lug] sf-lug.{org, com, info} & Registrant Email: no.valid.email at worldnic.com & Network Solutions / Web.com

[jim]

Let me know if I should do things.


On 01/06/2016 09:41 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu):
>
>>> Registrant Email: no.valid.email at worldnic.com
>>>
>>> 1.  It's risky to use non-deliverable e-mail addresses for any of the
>>> domain contact.  Reason:  Might not receive crucial mails.
>> A bit of research, and it looks like, for no.valid.email at worldnic.com
>> It's a bit of Network Solutions / Web.com shenanigans.
> At this point, I shouldn't be surprised to hear that NetSol is doing
> _another_ somewhat wrongful thing.
>
> Here's a case where NetSol made such a change to one of the four domain
> contacts (Registrant, Admin, Tech, Billing*) entirely on its own.
> (Querent wasn't specific about which one.)  Commenters weren't able to
> make sense of _why_ NetSol did that:
>
> https://www.namepros.com/threads/just-changed-networksolutions-whois-info-did-i-mess-up.841827/
>
> To clarify for readers:  Of the four contacts associated with a domain,
> Registrant is the most powerful and most important, as it is regarded as
> the domain's _owner_, i.e., entitled to overrule any action assented to
> by any of the others.
>
> It hadn't occurred to me that Jim's domains might display a Registrant
> e-mail address Jim hadn't specified, because registrars screwing around
> with that data (in particular) is Just Not Done.
>
> Here's a case where NetSol set Admin Contact to that address on
> someone's account.  Customer complained to NetSol, got on the telephone,
> complained, customer service rep. had to do an 'internal transfer'
> (moving the domain to a new NetSol customer account) and charged
> customer $3 to do this fix.
>
> http://www.domainstate.com/industry-news-6/evil-network-solutions-5059.html
>
> Third case, unspecified domain contact or contacts got set to the
> non-deliverable worldnic.net address by NetSol, _not_ by the customer.
> Customer urged by online commenters to get on the telephone and demand
> they fix this:
>
> http://www.futurequest.net/forums/showthread.php?t=10141
>
> Fourth case, one-star reviewer of NetSol comments:
>
>     I am a customer for over 1O years. NetSol exchange the email Registrant
>     Email Address to no.valid.email at worldnic.com. I don't know why. I like
>     to Change but I recive always standard answers that are already on the
>     website. With this support I will leave NetSol.
>
> http://www.whoishostingthis.com/hosting-reviews/network-solutions/
>
> Here's a letter from ICANN in 2002 to NetSol, complaining that they had
> numerous domains' contacts set to the non-deliverable worldnic.net address
> over a year after ICANN specifically threatened to terminate their
> ability to be a registrar over the practice.
>
> https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/touton-letter-to-beckwith-2002-09-03-en
>
> Which reminds me of a subsidiary point:  ICANN sends mail to domain
> owners and other domain contacts periodically to test whether the mail
> is deliverable, and reminding domain administrators of the requirement
> that contacts have valid e-mail addresses.  They occasionally threaten
> to unilaterally ordered cancelled domain registrations whose contacts
> cannot be reached.
>
>
> Anyway, if I were domain owner and the registrar were fooling with
> my Registrant data, for various reasons including the Registrant fields
> being mine alone and not theirs at all, I would be demanding that they
> fix that instantly and never touch it again unless I sell the domain
> or let it expire.
>
> That having been said, it's unlikely that this particular oddity will
> prevent transfer away from NetSol.  I haven't been a NetSol customer in
> 18 years, so cannot say for certain how they do things now, but,
> in my experience, most registrars let anyone with WebUI access to
> the domain account initiate a transfer.  Typically, if you've gone
> through all the required hoops -- turning off private registration,
> turning off transfer lock, getting an Authorization Code, providing the
> Authorization Code to the new registrar -- then NetSol sends
> instructions to Admin Contact on how to complete the transfer.
>
> They arrogantly, on their own authority, set a 30-day transfer lock if
> you have just made any of these changes:
>
> Primary Contact [sic] e-mail change
> Primary Contact [sic] name is changed
> WHOIS Administrative Contact e-mail is changed
> WHOIS Administrative Contact is changed
> User IDs are merged
> Primary Contact is replaced
>
> I don't know what they mean by 'Primary Contact' in this context.
> Could mean Registrant.
>
> They say that _if_ they've put a 30-day transfer lock on the domain 'to
> help prevent fraudulent transfer', or if they've whimsically done so for
> other reasons, you should call 'a transfer specialist at 1-877-307-1435
> for more information'.
>
> http://www.networksolutions.com/support/preparing-a-domain-name-for-a-transfer-out-of-network-solutions/
>
>
>
>> Don't know that it's an issue for matters such as transfer, etc., as,
>> as far as I'm aware, it's mostly quite exclusively the Admin email
>> address that gets used for that, not the "Registrant Email".  Also
>> appears lots of major domains are set with the email that way - and
>> seems on the quite long term, and it appears not to be a significant
>> operational issue (even though, at best, it's pretty funky and smells
>> suspiciously bad).
> What you said.
>
>> $ dig -t MX worldnic.com +short
>> 10 mx.myregisteredsite.com.
>> $ dig +short mx.myregisteredsite.com A mx.myregisteredsite.com AAAA
>> 209.17.115.10
>> $ telnet 209.17.115.10 25
>> no.valid.email at worldnic.com [198.144.194.235]
>> Trying 209.17.115.10...
>> Connected to 209.17.115.10.
>> Escape character is '^]'.
>> 220 inbound.net.registeredsite.com ESMTP SMTP Service (NO SPAM/UCE)
>> HELO [198.144.194.235]
>> 250 atl4mhib17.myregisteredsite.com Hello [198.144.194.235], pleased
>> to meet you
>> MAIL FROM:<Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu>
>> 250 2.1.0 <Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu>... Sender ok
>> RCPT TO:<no.valid.email at worldnic.com>
>> 250 2.1.5 <no.valid.email at worldnic.com>... Recipient ok
>> DATA
>> 354 Enter mail, end with "." on a line by itself
>> ^]
>> telnet> close
>> Connection closed.
>> $
> Well, it might be deliverable, but _to whom_?
>
>
> * Billing Contact is no longer reported in public WHOIS queries, but
> is still one of the four.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20160106/2a5a20c3/attachment.html>