EPP create limits / Army tagger's - Nominets answer

[jasman]

Like everyone said before changing the system wouldn't change anything nominet wants rid of drop catching and drop catchers this is a fine way to do it.

But it looks like the same cheats are at it again and even the people that wanted it are doing even better how odd..

Not necessarily. Dropcatchers and domain traders make up a significant percentage of the Nominet membership and vote and we've no plans to leave. The old management were taking the piss out of us and we banded together and booted them out, much to their surprise. The new management has gone to great lengths to reassure the membership that they wish to increase communication and trust between Nominet and its members.

If we can come together and tell Nominet that a significant chunk of the membership is not happy with the way some catchers are cheating and Nominet is failing to prevent it I think they will have to listen.

 

[impact]

Not necessarily. Dropcatchers and domain traders make up a significant percentage of the Nominet membership and vote and we've no plans to leave. The old management were taking the piss out of us and we banded together and booted them out, much to their surprise. The new management has gone to great lengths to reassure the membership that they wish to increase communication and trust between Nominet and its members.

If we can come together and tell Nominet that a significant chunk of the membership is not happy with the way some catchers are cheating and Nominet is failing to prevent it I think they will have to listen.

Well lets do something then as enough is enough.

 

[CreativeMix]

I'm no longer catching so not aware of the current state of play. At the risk of being nosy, what seems to be the problem?

 

[timter51]

I'm no longer catching so not aware of the current state of play. At the risk of being nosy, what seems to be the problem?

Catching has basically become a raffle now that drops are know to the second, everyone shoves 100s of CREATE requests down their EPP pipes that second (only 6 of these CREATE requests have a chance of getting the domain if you get your timing remotely right, from what I can tell) and hopes for the best. And as the old saying goes, buy enough tickets.... so those who have managed to circumvent Nom's rules and take ownership of loads of tags of course have an advantage. I haven't checked whose catching what and haven't for a long time, but that's the impression I get from this thread.

 

[CreativeMix]

Catching has basically become a raffle now that drops are know to the second, everyone shoves 100s of CREATE requests down their EPP pipes that second (only 6 of these CREATE requests have a chance of getting the domain if you get your timing remotely right, from what I can tell) and hopes for the best. And as the old saying goes, buy enough tickets.... so those who have managed to circumvent Nom's rules and take ownership of loads of tags of course have an advantage. I haven't checked whose catching what and haven't for a long time, but that's the impression I get from this thread.

But isn't that how it's always been? Nominet get £3.95 for each name that gets registered, they don't and never have cared who gives them that £3.95.

 

[timter51]

But isn't that how it's always been? Nominet get £3.95 for each name that gets registered, they don't and never have cared who gives them that £3.95.

Yep, pretty much!

 

[aquanuke]

It's an interesting setup now, throwing some calculations and math into your scripts you can pinpoint an exact time accounting for response so as to drop a single create. This works well on low contended but higher contended names have a latency spike which is hard to measure as that occurs at the exact moment of drop. There is no need to fire your load at a name which is lets face it crappy coding anyway. In all honesty would just be better if Nom limited it to one EPP request per name per TAG which would save all the resources, latency and cheating. Kinda of back to the PGP days in simplicity. After all what is the point of having 1000 bad requests limit per day if not just to appease the drop catching community, no purpose other than being resource hungry.

 

[Transcom ISP]

agreed, just limit the writes.. all fair game then..

 

[Transcom ISP]

Ineteresting from nominet on latency spikes...

Hi Bill,


I can assure you that our systems are able to handle the number of commands we’re receiving at a time. The latency of our systems processing time doesn’t have an impact, as long as your commands are as concise as possible, they’ll be handled in the same amount of time – as the system works, it’s whichever command lands on our server first which will catch the domain


Kind regards


Gary MacGregor-Manzi (he/him)
Technical Support Analyst

 

[Ben Thomas]

I would love to know how John Sisk is managing to be there first almost every time.

 

[aquanuke]

Im calculating/adjusting the latency in one thousandth of a ms. Im not saying its a problem, Im saying you need to vary your latency depending on the contention

 

[aquanuke]

I would love to know how John Sisk is managing to be there first almost every time.

Just ask him, nice guy been around forever

 

[Ben Thomas]

Just ask him, nice guy been around forever

I doubt he’d tell me, but I might just do that.

 

[Transcom ISP]

Im calculating/adjusting the latency in one thousandth of a ms. Im not saying its a problem, Im saying you need to vary your latency depending on the contention

yep, were all in microseconds, our reach to the epp is very fast but it does vary + / - 200 us on every check, the same on any one connecting from anywhare

 

[rob]

If you haven't seen it there is an interesting post on https://community.nominet.uk/t/new-domain-expiry-process-and-droplists-for-uk/673/171? - although wasnt that a tactic from early 2000s?!

 

[Paullas]

Smoke and Mirrors come to mind

 

[Ben Thomas]

If you haven't seen it there is an interesting post on https://community.nominet.uk/t/new-domain-expiry-process-and-droplists-for-uk/673/171? - although wasnt that a tactic from early 2000s?!

Surely everyone sets NS records after the catch though?

 

[super-whois]

after the catch though?

I'm not sure if best.uk.catch.software was set in the create request (no update time on RDAP/Whois), although I could be wrong. Clearly false advertising though!

 

[ukbackorder]

Lol I have never set nameservers at catch. I guess it's my turn in the barrel for you now is it?

 

[super-whois]

I have never set nameservers

I thought I was misremembering, but I have seen someone setting nameservers which must have been in the create request.