3 ms·

One thing you forget though, any email I've had that has been public on whois receives around 100+ spams per day, so the fact that their confirmation email look

One thing you forget though, any email I've had that has been public on whois receives around 100+ spams per day, so the fact that their confirmation email looks like spam and is also often automatically filtered to the spam folder is a problem because it's lost in a sea of useless emails that no one checks. In principle having whois records is fine and keeping them up to date is fine but because of bots and people who send spam to public addresses like that it doesn't make sense nowadays especially if you have multiple domain names for different businesses...

woliveirajr 10y ago
I do agree with you that spam is a problem. I'm not sure how good filters are, nowadays, if you create a rule to store emails from @icann, @whoisguard or so on, in a specific folder, whether this will or will not be mixed up with spam (I don't know if whoisguard, for example, always send some specific wording that could be filtered in to mark as "not spam"). My only point is that ICANN specifies that you should have a contact. Almost every site that I know don't have public information anymore, all information is hidden behind some service like whoisguard. In general it's a paid service. If don't pay/renew/etc, each one will have a procedure. In the case of whoisguard, it's to provide the information he had about the real owner. Good, that's what whoisguard did. (side note: was the OP checking his e-mail about informations sent from whoisguard, since it was a very old e-mail? Did he missed something by not checking it?) ICANN tried to confirm this change by sending e-mail to the e-mail they had. No luck. Officially, whoisguard wasn't in the circuit anymore, I don't know if ICANN should have contact them, and given that whoisguard had exactly the same address that they provided to ICANN whois (that old e-mail), don't think it would have made difference. Namecheap should have stepped in? Don't know. Perhaps, if they were diligent enough, they could know that whoisguard was expiring and be in contact with the OP. OTOH, they are separated companies, probably there wasn't any legal obligation in doing so, and I don't know if it suits their business model to be kind to their costumers. ICANN should have contacted namecheap? Don't think so. They had an e-mail address. They contacted it, as I understood. The OP didn't check it because.... it was an old e-mail and "who uses e-mails anyway". Yes, it had impact in one of his sites. Yes, nobody likes that. Yes, probably the OP is in anger right know, and might or might not read all these comments in a different mood in the future. I read this thread as lessons learnt: if you depend on something for your business, like ICANN, I'd take some steps to be sure that a bad "configuration" (the miss of auto-renew) doesn't add up with another problem (having an old e-mail as a contact) and with another one (don't checking that e-mail, don't having a forward rule, don't trying to filter it out outside spams)... to have such a problem. Even a kind of heartbeat if the site was alive or not seems to be important: weren't for some costumers complaining, how long would the site be out before the OP noticed?

woliveirajr 10y ago

I do agree with you that spam is a problem. I'm not sure how good filters are, nowadays, if you create a rule to store emails from @icann, @whoisguard or so on, in a specific folder, whether this will or will not be mixed up with spam (I don't know if whoisguard, for example, always send some specific wording that could be filtered in to mark as "not spam"). My only point is that ICANN specifies that you should have a contact. Almost every site that I know don't have public information anymore, all information is hidden behind some service like whoisguard. In general it's a paid service. If don't pay/renew/etc, each one will have a procedure. In the case of whoisguard, it's to provide the information he had about the real owner. Good, that's what whoisguard did. (side note: was the OP checking his e-mail about informations sent from whoisguard, since it was a very old e-mail? Did he missed something by not checking it?) ICANN tried to confirm this change by sending e-mail to the e-mail they had. No luck. Officially, whoisguard wasn't in the circuit anymore, I don't know if ICANN should have contact them, and given that whoisguard had exactly the same address that they provided to ICANN whois (that old e-mail), don't think it would have made difference. Namecheap should have stepped in? Don't know. Perhaps, if they were diligent enough, they could know that whoisguard was expiring and be in contact with the OP. OTOH, they are separated companies, probably there wasn't any legal obligation in doing so, and I don't know if it suits their business model to be kind to their costumers. ICANN should have contacted namecheap? Don't think so. They had an e-mail address. They contacted it, as I understood. The OP didn't check it because.... it was an old e-mail and "who uses e-mails anyway". Yes, it had impact in one of his sites. Yes, nobody likes that. Yes, probably the OP is in anger right know, and might or might not read all these comments in a different mood in the future. I read this thread as lessons learnt: if you depend on something for your business, like ICANN, I'd take some steps to be sure that a bad "configuration" (the miss of auto-renew) doesn't add up with another problem (having an old e-mail as a contact) and with another one (don't checking that e-mail, don't having a forward rule, don't trying to filter it out outside spams)... to have such a problem. Even a kind of heartbeat if the site was alive or not seems to be important: weren't for some costumers complaining, how long would the site be out before the OP noticed?