Domain Manage

Dac 1 & dac 2

Discussion in 'Nominet General Information' started by Whois-Search, Jan 16, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Whois-Search United Kingdom

    Whois-Search Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2004
    Posts:
    1,567
    Likes Received:
    27
    First of all I am in favour of the recent proposed changes to the DAC including the 'second' DAC:

    Latest News

    Which has been a good idea for sometime now:

    Nominet UK - Election of non-executive directors 2007 :: Sebastien Lahtinen :: My Vision for Nominet

    However is anyone else concerned about the proposed new interim access levels?

    Which gives large registrars or very large domainers more lookups:

    Interim access levels

    If I thought these extra lookups were going to be used for 'public' services then i'd be in favour of it - large registrars are at a disadvantage to take part in dropcatching afterall.

    However the business models of certain large registrars could be said to benefit from this change including those dropcatching thousands of domains to auction off later.

    I'm also well aware though that just because you have lots of lookups doesn't necessarily increase your dropcatching chances of high value names - it just gives you more opportunity the check more names.

    Finally the PAB actually resolved in September 2007:

    http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/28809_PAB52minutes_Sept_07.pdf

    If your a registrar that doesn't register 21,600 new domains every 12
    months but would like to offer a new availability service - how do you get
    more lookups?

    Cheers,

    Andrew Bennett
     
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
     
  3. retired_member6

    retired_member6 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    29
    They get more looks up? that aint right, when was this voted on by the membership and how do you complain?

    If they move them on to dac two with the delay, no worries is there?

    Thanks
    Lee
     
  4. foz

    foz Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    34
    The 2nd DAC has a time delay response of 100ms. Introduction

    Is the 2nd DAC unlimited? If so, it would advantageous, as people using the 1st DAC would need to be running at 100ms (over 24 hours) just to keep up?
     
  5. retired_member6

    retired_member6 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    5,605
    Likes Received:
    29
    Less than 22,000 domains a year would qualify, how many are domcollect - sedo's sister company getting these days? That works out at 60 a day, less even.
     
  6. foz

    foz Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    34
  7. foz

    foz Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    3,032
    Likes Received:
    34
    I suppose you could register 21,600 domains in one day (that were crap). and spend the rest of the year with unlimited access with a delayed response of 100ms.

    The "in" cost would be 21,600 x 5 = £108,000

    Would it be worth it?
     
  8. Skinner

    Skinner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2008
    Posts:
    4,325
    Likes Received:
    81
    If th 2nd Dac was unlimited it would end up one it knees. Because the way the Dac works (best i understand) it queues what you send, currently Dac 1 will accept 17 per second meaning about 60ms delay between checks, so to keep up with Dac 2, you'd burn your half million look ups in about 7 hours.

    So if you was to queue 40-50 a second the odds of you catching over DAC 1 are significant, as you send once every 60ms takes your program 100ms to respond and register a name, so if someone was to write lean code they could easily beat you.

    Anyone here wrote their own script wanna add a bit of code that times the Green Light dac look up, epp / pgp fire off to domain capture ? and give a ball park figure ?

    Dac 1 = Drop Catchers Toy

    Dac 2 = Glorified Bulk Whois

    Thats really what they are.
     
  9. tifosi United Kingdom

    tifosi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2004
    Posts:
    3,128
    Likes Received:
    45
    Agreed.

    In principle it's a sound idea. The removal of the suspended state & other bits from the response for dac1 makes it more like the DAC for the EU domains - and really only suitable as they say for 'time-dependent availability' checking.

    Not sure what the policy will be on using both servers. Will there be 2 subscriptions? Creating & updating lists will be much more efficient and I'll be able to go ahead with a planned uk bulk whois site.

    A couple of questions regarding limits:
    Will they be spanned across both servers?
    Will usage of both be allowed?
    Will usage of dac1 be kept as is?
    Is the flexible limits restricted to the time delay dac?

    S
     
  10. mofo

    mofo Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    307
    Likes Received:
    18
    Unless I am talking cr*p - the "Registered flag (full details)" in DAC2 probably means you will get other flags such as Y, N. E, R, I, B and not just Y/N.

    So DAC2 will be what we have now with 100ms delay.
     
  11. Skinner

    Skinner Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2008
    Posts:
    4,325
    Likes Received:
    81
    I assume Full Details means, Name, Address, Etc.

    They prob don't know themselves :)
     
  12. invincible

    invincible Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    81
    Those who use the existing DAC and determine if a domain name has been renewed against the suspended [y|n] field will need to update their code accordingly once this field is removed from the replacement live DAC.

    There will probably be two contracts; and possibly two payments. The cost is negligible at the moment of course.

    I believe the live DAC will be exactly the same as the existing DAC for all intents and purposes, except for the removal of the suspended and registration status fields.

    Yes. I believe so because the two DAC's are designed for different purposes.

    See above.

    I believe so otherwise they'd have stayed with a single DAC in the first place. The two DACs were to provide services for two distinct groups, allowing them to flex the usage independently. In practice I imagine the delayed DAC will be the only one to be flexed.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page