Fabulous auto renew (7.Viewing)

  • Topic Starter rlm
  • Start date
  • Replies: Replies 93
  • Views: Views 4,642
WHOIS Domain Name Lookup | CIRA

Is this the official database to check to make sure that renewals are actually getting renewed?

If you truly want to know what domains are registered to you at CIRA there is an easy way to do it.

First make sure you use the CIRA registered email address (the one used in your cira acoount) for all your .ca registrations.

Then log in here: Sign In

All domains with CIRA will be listed there, assuming you are using the same email address.

Please note: It can take up to 48 hours for your domains to appear there but its a great way to see all your .ca domains in one place.

Hint: Click on your name top right once logged in to see all your domains.
 
I probably should summarize my current guess.

affected registrar tried to do what we did (lock in a renewal) by deleting the domain and then redeeming it. Upon completing the redemption, they noted that the expiry date said the domain was renewed and their system figured things were "good". (They failed to note the domain was in "autoRenewPeriod" state.) At this point the registrar expected renewed domains to be in an "ok" state (anything but autoRenewPeriod). Everything would be fine if the story ended here.

... but it doesn't, at some point unpaid autorenewals need to be deleted. Since the registrar did NOT make a "mental note" (lol), they go through all their auto-renewals that are X (35 for us) days old, and delete them. Oops.

It's just a guess. But it fits. It fits too well : ( -
WHOIS Domain Name Lookup | CIRA

Is this the official database to check to make sure that renewals are actually getting renewed?
Yea you can also check the host registrars whois
 
Weirdly, no update on this CIRA mess of releasing expired domain names. The last I've heard from Richard was Feb 22, as he was asking for some clarification, to which I responded. Not a peep from CIRA in what is now more than a week. @richard.schreier
Yea you can also check the host registrars whois
Not in .ca. AFAIK, CIRA hosts the only whois record. And I personally think that's the way it should be. Compliance and availability is a clusterfu@% when left to registrars.
 
Weirdly, no update on this CIRA mess of releasing expired domain names. The last I've heard from Richard was Feb 22, as he was asking for some clarification, to which I responded. Not a peep from CIRA in what is now more than a week. @richard.schreier

Not in .ca. AFAIK, CIRA hosts the only whois record. And I personally think that's the way it should be. Compliance and availability is a clusterfu@% when left to registrars.
Good point
 
Weirdly, no update on this CIRA mess of releasing expired domain names. The last I've heard from Richard was Feb 22, as he was asking for some clarification, to which I responded. Not a peep from CIRA in what is now more than a week.

7d59xo.jpg
 
I heard from Richard last night, turns out he’s on vacation, will be back next week to follow up. I expect things to be resolved then.

I think MyID didn’t realize the scope of the problem either and initially dismissed it as a user error. But now that I’ve carefully explained it, they actually understand what really happened and have stated they will correct what they can on their own (for domains they recaptured). So I am happy to report that MyID plans to step up to do the right thing, and I applaud them for that!

However, they will have to rely on CIRA to do the right thing (return improperly dropped domains) with the other domains recaptured by other registrars, obviously that is out of their control.

So kudos to MyID!
 
Weirdly, no update on this CIRA mess of releasing expired domain names. The last I've heard from Richard was Feb 22, as he was asking for some clarification, to which I responded. Not a peep from CIRA in what is now more than a week. @richard.schreier
I am surprised at his silence also. He was last seen here on the 21st of February and I wonder if he is on vacation.
 
ll
However, they will have to rely on CIRA to do the right thing (return improperly dropped domains) with the other domains recaptured by other registrars, obviously that is out of their control.
If this happens and CIRA claws back TBR domains from other registrars, then MyID needs to be financially liable for the refunds. WHC, BM, Dot-CA, NamesPro didn't do anything wrong other than waste, time, money, effort and TBR links trying to "win" toxic MyID non-expired domains.

If Joe Q Domainer bought XYZ.ca for $500 at WHC et al, then MyID needs to pay the refund of $500 to get it back and correct their error. That's just how the world works when the screwup is your fault, but I can see CIRA arbitrarily letting MyID off the hook and making "everyone pay" for their mistake.

No one but MyID screwed up and no one but MyID should foot the bill to clean up their mess.

Otherwise they'll never learn.
 
Last edited:
ll

If this happens and CIRA claws back TBR domains from other registrars, then MyID needs to be financially liable for the refunds. WHC, BM, Dot-CA, NamesPro didn't do anything wrong other than waste, time, money, effort and TBR links trying to "win" toxic MyID non-expired domains.

If Joe Q Domainer bought XYZ.ca for $500 at WHC et al, then MyID needs to pay the refund of $500 to get it back and correct their error. That's just how the world works when the screwup is your fault, but I can see CIRA arbitrarily letting MyID off the hook and making "everyone pay" for their mistake.

No one but MyID screwed up and no one but MyID should foot the bill to clean up their mess.

Otherwise they'll never learn.
I’m pretty sure this is CIRA’s fault 100%. Unless of course they notified the registrars in advance of the backend changes they were making to the way domains were redeemed. Only then would the blame shift to the registrars.
 
I’m pretty sure this is CIRA’s fault 100%. Unless of course they notified the registrars in advance of the backend changes they were making to the way domains were redeemed. Only then would the blame shift to the registrars.

my two cents...

IMHO, CIRA made an un=announced (AFAIK) change to a badly documented part of the system (and also one of the least used parts) ... Obviously that's not a good thing... but to the best of this group's knowledge (and mine), only MyID managed to make that into a complete cluster-f*ck. I don't see 100% blame anywhere.

I would like to see, and I expect to see, CIRA rewind the affected domains. I'd be surprised to see anyone paying anyone else. Registrars of cancelled registrations should obviously be doing refunds. CIRA's registrar agreement gives them the ability to do pretty much whatever they want, and the only "right thing" is to rewind the renewed domains.

I haven't seen it in a long time, but I seem to remember CIRA covering a number of (registrant) mistakes in the past ... I'd like to believe they will continue the "we've got your back" policy. (@richard.schreier when you get back?)

Time will tell, and it may take time to figure out what the list of affected domains is. Fortunately, redeeming a domain and then deleting it again (possibly days later) should be a pretty rare sequence of events, and one that CIRA can trace even if MyID can not.

-Tom
 
This discussion is now merging into a specific client support issue which I am taking offline directly with @rlm and his colleague. For the record, the change referred to by @bmetal was a bug fix where domains pulled from redemption were in a temporary (up to 5 mins) "registered" status as opposed to "autorenew". Domains affected by the change resulted in an EXTRA year registration being applied to the term. CIRA has identified ALL domains which were renewed for extra years and we are reviewing those lists with registrars to find out which ones were legitimately renewed for multiple years and which ones should have been for a single year renewal. NONE of the domains affected were deleted or not renewed.

The CA domain lifecycle does not include the deletion of domains. A delete can only be executed by a registrar. When a delete is issued, the domain is placed in redemptiongrace at the end of which the domain goes into pendingdelete and ends up in TBR.
 
I heard from Richard last night, turns out he’s on vacation, will be back next week to follow up. I expect things to be resolved then.

I think MyID didn’t realize the scope of the problem either and initially dismissed it as a user error. But now that I’ve carefully explained it, they actually understand what really happened and have stated they will correct what they can on their own (for domains they recaptured). So I am happy to report that MyID plans to step up to do the right thing, and I applaud them for that!
However, they will have to rely on CIRA to do the right thing (return improperly dropped domains) with the other domains recaptured by other registrars, obviously that is out of their control.
So kudos to MyID!
Happy to hear that. Glad to know MyID is willing to do the right thing and appreciate your hard work @rlm for bringing this to all of our attention. Appreciate MyID's stance and hope this could be resolved correctly for the original owner.
 
This discussion is now merging into a specific client support issue which I am taking offline directly with @rlm and his colleague.
Can understand the need for it, but would like to hear how it was finally resolved for us also to be aware of it. Thanks.
 
Can understand the need for it, but would like to hear how it was finally resolved for us also to be aware of it.

Depending on who is ultimately at fault, and the action and the breadth of the solution, I bet you won't have to look too far. :p

The fallout is going to be right up there with "WHC sold a domain to 2 people", and potentially even worse if any of these domains were bought by a business (that is currently using it for commerce) or subsequently resold/pushed to another party.

Get your popcorn ready.
 
... Domains affected by the change resulted in an EXTRA year registration being applied to the term.

That's clearly an oversimplification. It certainly didn't happen that way at BareMetal.

The timelines all fit for the one example domain I know of (expired Dec 29th, "renewed" Jan 3rd, but ended up in the Feb 15th TBR run). It suggests a failed delete/redeem/renew on the 3rd, and the registrar deletes auto-renew-grace domains about 15 days after expiry. Don't get me wrong, the RAR should have seen that their processes failed on the 3rd... I'm just saying that "an EXTRA year" is a (gross) oversimplification, and that rubs me the wrong way.

The CA domain lifecycle does not include the deletion of domains. A delete can only be executed by a registrar. When a delete is issued, the domain is placed in redemptiongrace at the end of which the domain goes into pendingdelete and ends up in TBR.

:( NOT the "we've got your back" I hoped to hear. I'm going to have to think about this, might be a registrar up for sale.
 
I too don't generally feel it is necessary to discuss the particular backend details between CIRA and registrars in public. While it is certainly educational to domain investors to understand the life cycle better, I can also see how CIRA or really any business wouldn't want to air too much dirty laundry in public - with the caveat being that of course that only applies if the laundry is indeed being attended to. If the laundry is piled in the corner being ignored hoping it just disappears one day, well then that's what the forum is good for.

I also see that @bmetal is trying to provide critical insight into a problem that he'd otherwise not be asked about since he's not a direct party to the current problem. But it seems clear that his expertise and experience fixing their own issues can provide insight into what possibly occurred between CIRA and MyID. So thank you for that.

Unfortunately, I felt I had to bring this issue to the forum's attention for a few reasons:

1. To try and determine the scope of the problem and see if anyone else was affected or noticed similar issues.
2. Get certain people's attentions to be sure it wasn't simply brushed under the rug.
3. I felt time was of the essence, as time can only makes the problem worse, not better.
4. If a problem like this happens to any one of our domains at no fault of our own, we all want to know it'll be fixed fairly, i.e. that CIRA has our backs.

Since at least the first two goals have been achieved, I agree with @richard.schreier that it should be a private discussion going forward with CIRA, MyID and the registrant(s) and possibly @bmetal for their experience and insight from another registrar's perspective.

Unfortunately, I did throw around some accusations without all of the facts. And I do want to apologize.

First at MyID. I assumed that CIRA certainly couldn't be wrong, so it must be MyID's fault, right? And based on MyID's initial response, and although they didn't come out and say it, I wouldn't completely blame them if they were thinking "our code has been working fine for years, certainly this cannot be our fault" and then initially deflected blame on the registrant. But eventually they took me seriously and did conclude that something indeed went wrong, but they weren't sure exactly what went wrong just yet.

I then accused CIRA, obviously because of the implication that changes were made by CIRA to the redemption/renewal procedures, which affected Baremetal. Then to think that the chances of MyID having a completely unrelated bug which coincidentally manifested itself and was detected in the weeks following the CIRA changes to the same general procedures regarding redemption/renewals seemed way too improbable to believe it was just coincidence. Not impossible, but also not likely. Unfortunately, Richard went on vacation and the silence made me nervous that CIRA was dragging their feet or hoping it would just go away. Of course, now I know that he wasn't blowing me off, he was just on vacation and is now back on the case. So my apologies to @richard.schreier for making a stink about it without giving him a chance to fully investigate. In my defense, a quick message that he was going or already on vacay would have helped...

So I apologize for making accusations to both CIRA and MyID without all the facts. I guess I felt necessary at the time to help uncover the rest of the facts and bring attention to the issue.

And the one fact I think CIRA and MyID will now both agree to is that this was not the fault of the registrant. That leaves only CIRA and MyID. I don't care or even think its necessary if any blame is assigned at all, just that it get fixed. I feel like this is as minor as an oversight or miscommunication or however you want to characterize it so everyone comes out smelling like roses rather than turds. Shit happens, I really don't see it as a big deal, no heads need to roll, no lawyers are on speed dial, we're all human, lets just cooperate, identify the issue, fix the mess, do the right thing, and move on. Easy peasy, no?
 
my two cents...

IMHO, CIRA made an un=announced (AFAIK) change to a badly documented part of the system (and also one of the least used parts) ... Obviously that's not a good thing... but to the best of this group's knowledge (and mine), only MyID managed to make that into a complete cluster-f*ck. I don't see 100% blame anywhere.

I would like to see, and I expect to see, CIRA rewind the affected domains. I'd be surprised to see anyone paying anyone else. Registrars of cancelled registrations should obviously be doing refunds. CIRA's registrar agreement gives them the ability to do pretty much whatever they want, and the only "right thing" is to rewind the renewed domains.

I haven't seen it in a long time, but I seem to remember CIRA covering a number of (registrant) mistakes in the past ... I'd like to believe they will continue the "we've got your back" policy. (@richard.schreier when you get back?)

Time will tell, and it may take time to figure out what the list of affected domains is. Fortunately, redeeming a domain and then deleting it again (possibly days later) should be a pretty rare sequence of events, and one that CIRA can trace even if MyID can not.

-Tom
Tom, yes, CIRA will rewind ALL affected domains. As you know, you have received a list of the affected domains registered with you that were in redemption, were redeemed/restored and were identified as candidates for, as you call it, a rewind. A similar list has been shared with all other registrars who have affected domains and with their advisement, some will be "rewound" some will remain as is. Ultimately, the registrar in question will have/has the final say on which domains had an unintentional year added to the term and which did not (i.e. the added year was indeed intentional). We have had no other reports of a domain being deleted or lost by this process.
 
3. I felt time was of the essence, as time can only makes the problem worse, not better.
4. If a problem like this happens to any one of our domains at no fault of our own, we all want to know it'll be fixed fairly, i.e. that CIRA has our backs.
Exactly.. that was my point and need to know how it was resolved.
Unfortunately, I did throw around some accusations without all of the facts. And I do want to apologize.
Sorry from my end too, to MyID.
And the one fact I think CIRA and MyID will now both agree to is that this was not the fault of the registrant. That leaves only CIRA and MyID. I don't care or even think its necessary if any blame is assigned at all, just that it get fixed. I feel like this is as minor as an oversight or miscommunication or however you want to characterize it so everyone comes out smelling like roses rather than turds. **** happens, I really don't see it as a big deal, no heads need to roll, no lawyers are on speed dial, we're all human, lets just cooperate, identify the issue, fix the mess, do the right thing, and move on. Easy peasy, no?
And yes, we all make/made mistakes and it's only human to err, but takes great courage to admit.
I don't mind saying "Sorry" 10 times and mean it, when I am at fault.
 
** I HATE auto-renewals. When a domain that is in auto-renew-grace (or whatever it is) gets renewed... NOTHING happens (now). The registrar just makes a mental note not to delete the domain near the end of the auto-renew-grace window. Previously, we were able to jump hoops, cancel the auto-renewal and lock in a real renewal. We had to modify our systems to confirm to the more traditional auto-renewal model. This model has a number of negatives. 1) It's confusing... we frequently have arguments with clients about whether their domain is expired or not, 2) letting a domain expire, renewing it, then transfering it to another registrar will lose the renewal, 3) It's F'ing complicated. IMHO it was better back in 2000 when CIRA controlled the whole deletion process, but no, instead of "best practice" CIRA had to make it "industry standard" and follow the .com model. The only reason/guess I can see for this model is that verisign's lawyers didn't want to be responsible for deleting domains so they pushed it off to the registrars.

We are very much on the same page here Tom and I'm glad we're not the only ones who feel this way. I've voiced my concerns to Cira quite frankly as well. We were also deleting and then restoring the domains to renew them.

With their new changes, domains that have been manually and explicitly renewed by our clients are now in an "auto renewed" state, which from our perspective is a logical inaccuracy. They have not been "automatically" renewed, they were manually renewed. There are many other problems with this model as you've pointed out (no renewal emails sent out, a year being lost on transfer even if it was explicitly paid for with us, etc).

Everything is a bit of a mess now but CIRA seems to be sticking to their guns here.
 
Last edited:

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free for everyone.

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.

Back
Top Bottom