cctld Nov 24 TBR

[Daem0n]

I'm not taking sides here because I want to remain publicly impartial. All I know is that I've been doing the domain thing for a long time and I usually do it for "fun". This whole thing stinks of corruption at the highest levels. I do a lot of analysis and investigative work and can see tell-tale signs of a scandal. This thing runs deep with high financial and political consequences. This has been going on for a long time but nobody's done anything about it. Even if something is done in the next while it won't fix this situation.

I'm wondering if any others of you see a huge flaw in this whole system? You can't have the system set up this way? There are a lot of honest people, running honest business but without any regulation we can't trust anyone. The CIRA system is flawed by releasing names for a fixed price randomly and then allowing the registrars to set their own prices. The users can't see any transparency here. I know a huge business model is the registrars getting domains cheap and selling high at auction but this process needs to stop and we need to find a new way to do things. Who knows about shill bidding going on, price rigging, insiders' pricing and transactions, etc.

All I know is that I'm not here to get rich, I was always here for "fun" and now a lot of that feeling is lost. It's been a very sad week in the domain industry and this represents the worst of the worst. This is not the image I wanted portraid to others that I'm trying to get interested in the industry.

-Joe

 

[Spex]

Very good questions MSN. I am particularly interested in one person with the last name of Campbell who used to a Pool employee who all of a sudden got a job at CIRA. She is still part of the Pool alumni at Linkedin.

Wow. And I have proof of at least one more person in a situation like this...what the hell is going on?

 

[whitebark]

Did anyone ever hear back from CIRA?

 

[pandersen]

What is a channel manager and do they have any say on whether a TBR session gets canceled?

<snip>

What does channel manager mean?

Did she have any role in yesterday's decision?

The channel manager is a liaison between CIRA and its network of registrars. The current one has been with CIRA for almost a decade in various roles.

I've have the pleasure of working with her in a variety of roles over the years and she is very much an above board and outstanding asset to the organization. As channel manager I am quite sure she was involved in whatever discussions occurred in the eventual decision to cancel yesterdays run.

Regardless of the fact she may have worked for Momentous (and if I recall correctly worked on the retail side of momentous - not Pool) over a decade ago does not logically lead to the conclusion she (or anyone) at CIRA made decisions that favour Pool.


Cheers,

-p

 

[flong101]

pandersen,

As a registrar and current director, have you been advised of what caused the cancellation?

Aren't you disturbed by the fact that it seems that this happened because pool had a technical error?

Does anyone from industry canada oversee CIRA operations and how do we get in touch with them?

Does CIRA board of directors have any ability or mandate to investigate a situation that is starting to blow out like nothing we have seen in 11 years?

The discussion now as you can tell has evolved into terms such as scandal, worse week ever in domaining history, cover up, and other horrible issues that I believe the board needs to intervene.

Who oversees CIRA and who has the right to intervene and investigate?

How can one reach Byron the president of CIRA?

Is Byron aware of what happened yesterday?

Has he approved the cancellation?

 

[CanSpace]

Just got an email from CIRA. I'll post more details after I've had time to digest it a bit. But ultimately it came down to registrar incompetence.

CIRA claims that "Registrars who were not able to participate in TBR may have arrived at a reasonable, although mistaken, interpretation of the TBR rules"

They also claim that "between three to seven Registrars could not participate in TBR", but also go on to claim that "much of the relevant data of the Registrar login information is encrypted. Because of this, and depending on which command type was used, we cannot specifically identify affected Registrars"

Again I'm not going to post further opinions on this until I've had time to let it digest. But I think people are capable of drawing their own conclusions...

 

[pandersen]

Latest registrar advisory... Hot off the presses...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Dear Registrars,

Further to the Registrar Advisory that was sent to you last evening, I wanted to provide you with an interim update on TBR. As promised, you can expect to receive a document by close of business Friday that clarifies the use of fields to assure full participation in the December 1, 2010 TBR session.

The decision to cancel TBR yesterday was not made lightly and involved a great deal of consultation with our technical staff who reviewed in detail the results of the TBR session. They used previously established protocols that have been followed in past instances when we have cancelled TBR. Based on this analysis, we determined that the session was not fair and equitable across the entire TBR Registrar community.

The errors that occurred were not connection-related (ability to reach TBR), but rather related to the integrity of the transactions themselves (incorrect data). It appears that the Registrars who were not able to participate in TBR may have arrived at a reasonable, although mistaken, interpretation of the TBR rules. Although unconfirmed, it seems possible that they may have applied updated principles that are now present in the new EPP registry to the TBR system even though that system did not change as part of the rewrite. Regrettably, the wording that CIRA used to instruct Registrars around the use of fields could be reasonably interpreted in more than one way.

It is important to note that this issue was not restricted to only one Registrar. A clear pattern was seen across a number of Registrars.

The only fair way to deal with this situation was to cancel TBR. Ultimately, this decision protects Canadians who wish to register a .CA. For those Registrants whose Registrar was among those who could not participate in this TBR session, we have assured their right to equal opportunity to this public resource.

I also want to stress that for security purposes, much of the relevant data of the Registrar login information is encrypted. Because of this, and depending on which command type was used, we cannot specifically identify affected Registrars, however we do know that between three to seven Registrars could not participate in TBR.

When you receive tomorrow’s documentation, please take great care in following the instructions which clarify the use of fields to ensure you can participate in TBR. Registrars that fail to follow these clarifications will not be able to successfully participate in TBR.

CIRA will again be offering Registrars the opportunity to test your system in the TBR environment.

 

[CanSpace]

One thing I WILL say. I am absolutely baffled at what "mistaken interpretation" this other registrar (or these other registrars) arrived at. There were virtually no changes to make to our existing scripts and the documentation was remarkably clear.

 

[stewie]

We have a problem here...and its way beyond the questionable TBR drops.

 

[flong101]

An abhorrent amount of BS and a pitiful attempt by cira and pool to cover up the scandalous decision that happened yesterday.

"we cannot specifically identify affected Registrars" LOL

That's all you came out with Richard?

Hiding behind an encrypted data?

LOL

The good news for CIRA and Pool is that we managed to break their encryption and identified the affected registrars. Here is a hint:

They are not sibername, baremetal, egate, myid, namespro, burmac, fastweb, or canspace.

They are internic.ca, rebel.ca, and then tens of registrars owned by Momentous.ca.

And FYI to CIRA...If you look hard enough you will find that the affected registrars are dozens and not 3-7.

Straightforward BS to cover up the scandalous decision of yesterday.

Now based on Canspace reply earlier today, it seems the only thing that was different TBR wise from the pre EPP era is that each registrar uses a unique IP.

Based on that, this must be the reason why pool failed yesterday as whatever code they used before would still work. In other words, no new scripts are needed.

The only thing they had to do was use a unique IP for each of their dozens of registrars.

It seems they did not.

And because of that, CIRA decided to spit at all other registrars, and all registrants that have wasted huge amounts of time on this matter week after week.

If this is not flagrant mismanagement, then what is?

So the question here is: Are we dealing with incompetence, recklessness, or malice?

Incompetence is basically when someone tries to do a job that they cannot do well.

Recklessness is when someone makes a stupid decision without understanding its consequences and end up causing harm to themselves and/or others. Example: reckless driving.

Malice is when someone makes an informed decision with the intent to cause harm.

There was definite incompetence from Pool side.

But CIRA role in this is nothing less than malice. They intentionally made an unjustifiable decision the sole purpose of which is to steal from the pockets of all registrars to stuff Richard's pockets. This is malicious intent.

Not to mention all the violations of the anti competitiveness rules of canada.

CIRA's decision yesterday and their laughable attempt at a coverup will end up being the first nail in the coffin of the current management. This is a flagrant misuse of a public national asset with the clear intent to benefit from it while depriving others of fair competition.

Now that all is in the open and we have zero doubt of what has happened, how do we get Industry Canada to investigate?

If you have any info in that regard but do not want to post, please PM me with any info you may have.

 

[Namefox]

Latest registrar advisory... Hot off the presses...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Dear Registrars,

Further to the Registrar Advisory that was sent to you last evening, I wanted to provide you with an interim update on TBR. As promised, you can expect to receive a document by close of business Friday that clarifies the use of fields to assure full participation in the December 1, 2010 TBR session.

The decision to cancel TBR yesterday was not made lightly and involved a great deal of consultation with our technical staff who reviewed in detail the results of the TBR session. They used previously established protocols that have been followed in past instances when we have cancelled TBR. Based on this analysis, we determined that the session was not fair and equitable across the entire TBR Registrar community.

The errors that occurred were not connection-related (ability to reach TBR), but rather related to the integrity of the transactions themselves (incorrect data). It appears that the Registrars who were not able to participate in TBR may have arrived at a reasonable, although mistaken, interpretation of the TBR rules. Although unconfirmed, it seems possible that they may have applied updated principles that are now present in the new EPP registry to the TBR system even though that system did not change as part of the rewrite. Regrettably, the wording that CIRA used to instruct Registrars around the use of fields could be reasonably interpreted in more than one way.

It is important to note that this issue was not restricted to only one Registrar. A clear pattern was seen across a number of Registrars.

The only fair way to deal with this situation was to cancel TBR. Ultimately, this decision protects Canadians who wish to register a .CA. For those Registrants whose Registrar was among those who could not participate in this TBR session, we have assured their right to equal opportunity to this public resource.

I also want to stress that for security purposes, much of the relevant data of the Registrar login information is encrypted. Because of this, and depending on which command type was used, we cannot specifically identify affected Registrars, however we do know that between three to seven Registrars could not participate in TBR.

When you receive tomorrow’s documentation, please take great care in following the instructions which clarify the use of fields to ensure you can participate in TBR. Registrars that fail to follow these clarifications will not be able to successfully participate in TBR.

CIRA will again be offering Registrars the opportunity to test your system in the TBR environment.

Sounds carefully scripted by legal counsel.

 

[fwdtech]

CIRA will again be offering Registrars the opportunity to test your system in the TBR environment.

This, to me, seems to be the most obvious question of the past 3 weeks.

Have not CIRA and the TBR registrars done practice runs in October?

If not, why not?

If so, why the cancellation, as any errors, whether by CIRA or by a registrar, should have been detected and corrected?

 

[westcoaster]

I am sure glad I do not run my business the way Cira runs theirs. I would be broke about now. It's one thing to make a mistake, it's another to not commmunicate to your clients what the problem is. It's an even larger mistake to BS the client and hope he is stupid enough to buy the BS. I don't know what to make of Pool, I have never done business with them and after reading earlier posts, I will most likely never deal with them. Usually in these types of conflicts there is truth on both sides. If this is the case then Pool and Cira need to be held accountable for their choices. Now let me see if i can reg cirapool.ca

ciragate.ca
poolgate.ca
never_gonna_be_a_tbr.ca

 

[Spex]

... Now let me see if i can reg cirapool.ca

ciragate.ca
poolgate.ca
never_gonna_be_a_tbr.ca

Go with the .com's instead...don't give CIRA any more money

 

[msn]

I have given this matter some thought:

If anything, CIRA could/should have put up a 'sandbox' for registrar partners to use in testing the new TBR concept if it was so complicated that 'many' registrars could not reasonably determine the correct manner in which to interface with the CIRA system.

Shame on CIRA.

On the other hand, if the Momentous group could not, after four weeks, determine that it was not able to handle the new transactional method and instead made a telephone call to CIRA to withdraw a running TBR, shame on both of them.

An obvious conclusion here is that this episode was entirely avoidable.

At issue is the matter of allowing multiple registrar partners for a single entity, which really is a very bad practice.

Multiple affiliated registrar partners are allowed by CIRA but this clearly places CIRA in a conflict of interest as it then collects a fee for each new registrar partner created and an annual renewal fee for every registrar partner. This incentivises CIRA to have as many registrar partners as possible even when those are concentrated in the hands of only a few groups.

Given the high volume of .ca domain name registrations there could be no excuse that CIRA relies upon this as a crucial source of funding.

Here I will note that the registry operator of .de in Germany, DENIC, specifically prohibits multiple registry partners for entities with automatic cancellation of the registry partner if such situation occurs.

Had CIRA this same policy, the problem of multiple registrars on the very same IP address and/or server from last week would most likely not have happened.

Likewise, the actual and apparent oversize voice the Momentous group has with CIRA would be brought into line with all other registrar partners.

I therefore call upon everyone to contact the Competition Bureau to direct CIRA to require that every CIRA registrar partner as of January 1, 2011 be independent as under the DENIC best practice. This can instantly be accomplished by CIRA ending the registrar partner agreements with every entity which holds more than one .ca registry connection, and can be enforced by ordinary users by researching the company registry forms in your local government offices and by checking any registrar or TBR web site which offers results from two or more registrar partners.

The current situation has created a 'first amongst equals' situation for registrars and caused higher costs for us since one group with a significant proportion of the TBR transactions is able to thereby increase the cost of TBR domain name registrations from the industry average of $12.99 to $60.00

All of this is very clearly anti-competitive and contrary to a free and open market. I call upon everyone, especially registrar partners, to contact the Competition Bureau, Industry Canada and your local Member of Parliament.

 

[flong101]

Having had some additional time to think about this, I am now 100% certain that we are dealing with a malicious decision by CIRA to protect the interests of Momentous at the expense of all other registrars . The extremely incompetent attempt at coverup removed the tiny doubt that was there. It is extremely easy to shred this last advisory to pieces.

This is a real problem and a serious issue that needs to be investigated ASAP by both CIRA and Industry Canada. As CIRA stands to lose the most from this, we urge them to start their own investigation immediately and while the investigation is ongoing, Nov 24 results should not be messed with. Otherwise, and in case any wrongdoing is unveiled, serious damages will be levied and would be due to all affected registrars. If Dec 1 goes through, all affected registrars are encouraged to compare results and any name they lost to Pool and they should be compensated for with interest. Anyone that has backorders with Pool is encouraged to post the final sale price of the auctions they were involved in with Pool so that the affected registrars can calculate the exact amount they lost in this debacle. This will be important to calculate damages as accurately as possible.

CIRA was created to manage and regulate the .ca space for all canadians not just for Momentous.

With this scandal, whoever made that decision to cancel and whoever was involved in the wording of their advisories, has made it clear to all that CIRA (Canadian Internet Regulation Authority) has actually become MIRA (Momentous Internet Regulation Authority) or RIRA (Richard Internet Regulation Authority). Anyone involved in the decision to cancel Nov 24 session must be dealt with appropriately by CIRA. CIRA should make its own investigation. Industry Canada should investigate as well.

The .ca domain is a national public asset and this flagrant abuse of authority should not pass.

We call on all to get involved and reach out to Industry Canada to start an investigation in what happened the late hours of Nov 24.

It is extremely important that every affected registrar keeps all their data from Nov 24 TBR session as this will likely turn invaluable to an investigation once it starts.

In an earlier post, Richard mentioned that the Nov 24 preliminary results are accessible. How can we see these results? Please PM me. If anyone had access to these results, please take screenshots and document as much as possible.

The various PMs and emails I received on the subject highlight the tremendous amount of concern many people are having with this matter. The interesting part is that many have been well aware of the flagrant conflict of interest that is happening between CIRA and Momentum. It is time to address the elephant in the room.

Please get involved and contact industry canada seeking an investigation.

http://www.dnforum.com/f510/industry...ad-439551.html

Every cent that Pool makes on Wednesday is money they should not have and dollars they are not entitled to. This is as illegal as it gets and should not be allowed to stand. Had the same scenario happened to any of the other registrars, CIRA would have just said tough luck. The special treatment Momentous has received cries against all rules of fairness and impartiality and is nothing less than a disgrace.

If I were Richard, I would make the decision to voluntarily not participate in Dec 1, 2010 TBR. In the long scheme of things, this would turn into a very very wise decision.

Please take a minute and contact Industry Canada and let them know in no uncertain terms that the .ca domain is a public asset that should not succumb to corporate greed.

http://www.dnforum.com/f510/industry...ad-439551.html

If you know any lawyer with expertise in this field and who would be interested in assisting, please either post or pm me their info.

 

[Pool.com]

I will post one last entry in an attempt to simply focus on the facts, not conjecture, not innuendo, not blind accusation, not hunches, just the facts. I am here in this forum to discuss real issues and encourage all readers of this forum to focus on just that, real issues. Not fabrications or accusations that have no basis in fact. Not some continued tirade by somone who seems to have their own personal agenda.

The facts are very simple. A number of registrars were unable to access the tbr successfully on Wed Nov 24 and as a result CIRA made the difficult decision to cancel the tbr and reschedule to Dec 1st allowing all registrars to have equal access. If you don't think this was a difficult decision, you can be sure that CIRA would have predicted the BS response that is coming from some of you and I think they might instead have chosen the path of least resistance. Rather, they chose to implement the right decision and are now paying the price in public opinion. CIRA has publicly stated that more than one registrar was affected and they have further publicly stated that there were ambiguities in the information presented about tbr processing which they have since clarified by issuing a document that clearly defines the current tbr command requirements. I am confident that CIRA's statements and their justifcation for cancelling hold up to any scrutiny including investigation by Industry Canada and the Auditor Generals Office if need be. Neither CIRA nor I are hiding behind some forum alias and I certainly have posted previously that I welcome any investigation and any further discussion. I am more than willing to create the opportunity for the parties to sit at one table and review this whole scenario including Pool.com, CIRA and Industry Canada.

However, I refuse to continue this pissing context with flong101 who continues to hide behind the anonymity of his alias in this forum. I don't know who he is and for all I know he may be a disgruntled competitor of mine that clearly has no interest in seeing any decision that CIRA makes come to his disadvantage. There is no doubt in my mind that some registrars will regain equality as a result of the CIRA decision and possibly some will not perform as well on the Dec 1st drop. Pool certainly intends to do our best to resume our normal exceptional performance.

I remain open to discuss this issue with anyone that cares to have a legitimate conversation in facts and, as posted before can be reached directly by email ([email protected]) or by phone (613-221-1207). I will post this same response in the other thread in this forum as well.

 

[fwdtech]

I will post one last entry in an attempt to simply focus on the facts, not conjecture, not innuendo, not blind accusation, not hunches, just the facts.

I would only like to know (as far as this thread is concerned) whether test TBR runs were done or not.

If not, why not - is that not a rather obvious necessity ( 2 months to practice is pretty long)?

If practice runs were done, then why was there a problem on the 24th?

 

[Namefox]

I will post one last entry in an attempt to simply focus on the facts, not conjecture, not innuendo, not blind accusation, not hunches, just the facts. I am here in this forum to discuss real issues and encourage all readers of this forum to focus on just that, real issues. Not fabrications or accusations that have no basis in fact. Not some continued tirade by somone who seems to have their own personal agenda.

The facts are very simple. A number of registrars were unable to access the tbr successfully on Wed Nov 24 and as a result CIRA made the difficult decision to cancel the tbr and reschedule to Dec 1st allowing all registrars to have equal access. If you don't think this was a difficult decision, you can be sure that CIRA would have predicted the BS response that is coming from some of you and I think they might instead have chosen the path of least resistance. Rather, they chose to implement the right decision and are now paying the price in public opinion. CIRA has publicly stated that more than one registrar was affected and they have further publicly stated that there were ambiguities in the information presented about tbr processing which they have since clarified by issuing a document that clearly defines the current tbr command requirements. I am confident that CIRA's statements and their justifcation for cancelling hold up to any scrutiny including investigation by Industry Canada and the Auditor Generals Office if need be. Neither CIRA nor I are hiding behind some forum alias and I certainly have posted previously that I welcome any investigation and any further discussion. I am more than willing to create the opportunity for the parties to sit at one table and review this whole scenario including Pool.com, CIRA and Industry Canada.

However, I refuse to continue this pissing context with flong101 who continues to hide behind the anonymity of his alias in this forum. I don't know who he is and for all I know he may be a disgruntled competitor of mine that clearly has no interest in seeing any decision that CIRA makes come to his disadvantage. There is no doubt in my mind that some registrars will regain equality as a result of the CIRA decision and possibly some will not perform as well on the Dec 1st drop. Pool certainly intends to do our best to resume our normal exceptional performance.

I remain open to discuss this issue with anyone that cares to have a legitimate conversation in facts and, as posted before can be reached directly by email ([email protected]) or by phone (613-221-1207). I will post this same response in the other thread in this forum as well.

Yes, but what registrars were affected? Was it only Momentus Group? That is the issue...was it only Momentus that had difficulty with TBR release?