On 23 Sep 2002 at 17:53, Bruce Tonkin wrote:

> I do not agree that it is the role of the registry to inform registrants
> about expiry, just as it is not auDA role to do this.
> We have a competitive registrar market, and it is the registrars'
> responsibility for managing customer contact in consultation with resellers
> - there is a large section in the code of conduct that deals with customer
> contact.  Registrants will eventually choose registrars that have reliable
> full life-cycle systems.  ie some new entrants may focus on new
> registrations with no systems for maintenance or renewal of domain names.
> 

My beefs were:
a) the fact that Ausregistry has taken down an active web site without taking any action 
to aprise the registrant that they were going to do it. 
b) Connect West had become the registrar even though they had not been authorised 
by the registrant to become the registrar
c) notwithstanding the fact that the renewal was paid now more than 24 hours ago to the 
registrar the Ausregistry database has not been updated and the domain is not visible.

I would have thought that b) would be of particular interest to you Bruce.

In regard to c) it is hard to see how registrants in the predicament this registrant finds 
itself in have been in any way advantaged by this new system. Under the old system 
the MIT records would have been updated within a couple of hours and the site visible.

And would somebody please explain how it is that Connect West could become the 
registrar without having any authorisation from the registrant.

cb