Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > > The disadvantage of a nameserver-attribute arrangement is that, if the > domain in question gets deleted, there isn't really a way within EPP > to refuse that, because there's no necessary relationship between the > nameserver attributes (they're just attributes, after all) and the > domain object that is being removed. So there's a greater opportunity > to create lame delegations.
But that check doesn't work for delegations that span mutiple registries. If gratisdns.dk disappears there's nothing nic.at can do about the now-lame nameserver attributes on dotat.at. And there were earlier discussions in this thread about how registrars can force delegations to go lame so that they can cancel a deadbeat customer's domain. (Yeah, I'm kind of grumpy about EPP host objects. I can't just write an API client that says, make my domain's delegation look like this. The combination of inter-object dependencies and asynchronous updates makes for a ridiculously complicated state machine that has to poll waiting for changes to take effect. Yuck.) Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <[email protected]> https://dotat.at/ Fair Isle: Northerly or northeasterly backing northwesterly 3 to 5, occasionally 6 in north and east. Moderate, occasionally rough in north and east. Wintry showers. Good, occasionally poor. _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
