Lock State

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

What do people here think about the Lock State issues / questions?

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/20834_Lock_states_issues_and_questions.pdf

In order to formulate policy proposals we ask the PAB the following questions:
1. Should a policy on lock states be considered, or are the issues raised so interlinked with the nature of the three way contract and our processes, that they cannot be considered in isolation?
2. Is it appropriate to introduce lock states that enable the registrar to prevent the registrant from carrying out certain functions?
3. Is it appropriate to introduce lock states that enable the registrant to prevent others, possibly including the registrar from carrying out certain functions?
4. If lock states under the control of the registrant are introduced then should the registrar also be able to set/unset them?
5. What other issues are there that might be solved by lock states?

REGISTRY-LOCK and REGISTRAR-LOCK works well with com and net domains:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc11/msg01504.html
Even UK2 and Joker seem to let you take the lock off these days?

However the Nominet proposal is also talking about locking the whois record by either them or by the registrar?

How would you feel if Nominet changed your registrant type from UK Individual opt-out to UK Individual (opt-in) or UK Sole Trader - then locked the domain record?

If a registrant deliberately supplies false address details shouldn't the registrar inform Nominet to cancel the domain? Instead of changing the whois for them and locking it?

Will be interesting to see what the ICO say about all this.

 

[robrob is verified member.]

One view is that lock state is useful in .com etc due to the 'hands off' transfer procedure.

With Nominet and .uk they are happy to process transfers manually (with checks) and will roll back transfers if issues are found.

Hijacking in the transfer sense is almost unheard of in .uk.