Problems do exists and some are very frustrating!
To date I've used about 3 dozen (perhaps more) registrars.
The problems that exists at Tucows are *NOTHING* compared
to other registrars. I think Tocows is doing an
outstanding job compared to any other registrar out their.
And yes, the work will never be completed, that is the
nature of this beast.
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:19:45 -0800 (PST)
Tim Woodcock <twoodcock@baremetal.com> wrote:
>Hi tucows.
>
>I am really tired of finding and hearing about serious
>flaws in the domain
>registration system. It is not the fact that they are
>there, or even that
>they are slow to be fixed. (eg: Re: Fatal Server Error
>when adding
>nameserver, a problem that has apparently been around for
>a while)
>
>I am tired of hearing about new products when the domain
>registration
>product, released years ago has never been finished, and
>the documentation
>is missing and/or incorrect.
>
>I am happy that you have staff working on fixing things,
>but PLEASE listen
>to us and get things fixed, preferrably now rather than
>later.
>
>Example:
>"Invalid private key"
>
>We have been getting this message from the client
>periodically in the bulk
>system for over a year. Recently, it has come up in the
>regular
>registration system.
>
>A little investigation reveals that the software is lying
>to us.
>There is a piece of code that translates "No response
>from server" into
>"invalid private key".
>
>The reason for this is simple: The client does not know
>how to fail a
>login gracefully. The SERVER has responses that would
>tell the client
>what happened and why, but the client does not know how
>to read them.
>
>The solution is easy enough. If you fail to decript the
>data you were
>sent, process the result as the unencrypted data that it
>is.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tim Woodcock
> twoodcock@baremetal.com
> BareMetal.com Inc.
> http://baremetal.com/
> Software Development Team
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message received 2003-11-21 from 'inbox@fpgatools.com':
>
>> Been there many times but using the RWI. :(
>>
>> The system is excessively picky about the names sever
>> specification. I have forgotton all the problems / bugs
>>--
>> I now just copy a previous (successful) registration so
>>I
>> can avoid the problem..
>>
>> If memory serves; The problem typically goes away if you
>> specfiy DNS server in lower case (UDNS1.ULTRADNS.NET &
>> UDNS2.ULTRADNS.NET are the ones that get me all the
>>time)
>> and the servers must be valid and specified. For example
>>I
>> often register .INFO's and then have to manually delete
>> the DNS servers via the manage interfaces (names that
>>I'm
>> purchasing for future use but want to avoid having
>>domain
>> speculators mine the ZONE for and monitor what I'm
>>doing).
>>
>> I really feel the interface should be more forgiving
>>about
>> what you enter. Perhap just a warning versus complete
>> failure. I feel pretty strongly about this as it's very
>> frustrating to manually enter an order and then have the
>> entier order lost because of a single typo -- This
>>really
>> needs to be fixed!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:57:00 -0800
>> "Mike" <mike@mrhost.ca> wrote:
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I'm receiving a 400: Fatal Server Error Occured when
>> >trying to add a
>> >name server to a domain on the test system via the API.
>> >
>> >I can update and remove name servers fine- I only get
>>the
>> >error when
>> >adding one.
>> >
>> >I went through the archives and saw a few other related
>> >messages, but
>> >didn't see any solutions- maybe I missed them.
>> >
>> >I'm passing the command as:
>> >
>> >Array
>> >(
>> > [action] => modify
>> > [object] => domain
>> > [cookie] => 659305612:391169
>> > [attributes] => Array
>> > (
>> > [data] => nameserver_list
>> > [nameserver_list] => Array
>> > (
>> > [name] => ns2.domaindirect.com
>> > [action] => add
>> > )
>> > )
>> >
>> > [registrant_ip] => 10.0.1.2
>> > [protocol] => XCP
>> >)
>> >
>> >as far as I can tell from the documentation, that's
>> >correct.
>> >
>> >Any help would be appreciated.
>> >
>> >On a side note- "Occurred" (in the error message) has
>>two
>> >r's :)
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> >
>> >Mike Pultz
>> >mike@mrhost.ca
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:50 EDT