The most Overpriced .CA Domains on GoDaddy Auction (1.Viewing)

Some people have "scripts" that try to get names over and over again. Esdiel @Esdiel you'd have to look in another thread for some additional explanation but essentially there are some names that "were" in the 3rd level, no longer are and hence are due to be released. We are in the process of cleaning that up and will be sending names that qualify through TBR in a controlled way (I think there are lots of them). When we do, there will be a separate list published along with the TBR week where they will be released. In the future we hope the process will be automated such that when a name is no longer registered at the 3rd and 4th level it is automatically made available in TBR at the 2nd (assuming it is not already registered at the 2nd).

The interesting tidbit is that all of those names will be temporarily registered to "CIRA" in some fashion (you'll be able to see it in WHOIS) which allows us to put the names through the standard TBR release. Stay tuned and thanks for everyone's patience.
 
Thanks Richard.

Not to go on about the municipal status but the official database cira uses is the "Canadian Geographical Names Data Base (CGNDB)" isn't it?

This is a link to it below I believe and Andrew is listed:

Place names - Search Results

What am I missing?
 
Esdiel said:
Thanks Richard.

Not to go on about the municipal status but the official database cira uses is the "Canadian Geographical Names Data Base (CGNDB)" isn't it?

This is a link to it below I believe and Andrew is listed:

Place names - Search Results

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Sorry. I don't think that can be the official list since the others aren't reserved/restricted either. It is the correct database though, according to cira's regulations:

4. municipal names listed in the following classes in the applicable version of the Canadian Geographical Names Data Base (CGNDB): city, ville, town, village, hamlet, hameau, other municipal/district area – major agglomeration, autre zone municipale /de district – agglomerations majeure, other municipal/district area- miscellaneous and autre zone municipale/de district – divers. The Applicant for registration of a municipal name must be the corresponding government entity and the name in the registrant field for the registration of a municipal Domain Name must be the full legal name of the Applicant for registration. The Domain Name must comply with the other provisions of this Section 3, and municipal names consisting of more than one word may only be registered as one word. If there is more than one municipality eligible to apply for the registration of the same Domain Name, the Applicant must get the consent of all the other eligible municipalities. In cases where a municipal name is the same as the name of a Canadian province or territory, the Applicant may only register the municipal name as a fourth level Domain Name. Municipal Domain Names cannot be transferred to any other party without CIRA’s prior, written consent; and
 
Last edited:
Esdiel said:
Sorry. I don't think that can't be the official list since the others aren't reserved/restricted either. It is the correct database though, according to cira's regulations:

4. municipal names listed in the following classes in the applicable version of the Canadian Geographical Names Data Base (CGNDB): city, ville, town, village, hamlet, hameau, other municipal/district area – major agglomeration, autre zone municipale /de district – agglomerations majeure, other municipal/district area- miscellaneous and autre zone municipale/de district – divers. The Applicant for registration of a municipal name must be the corresponding government entity and the name in the registrant field for the registration of a municipal Domain Name must be the full legal name of the Applicant for registration. The Domain Name must comply with the other provisions of this Section 3, and municipal names consisting of more than one word may only be registered as one word. If there is more than one municipality eligible to apply for the registration of the same Domain Name, the Applicant must get the consent of all the other eligible municipalities. In cases where a municipal name is the same as the name of a Canadian province or territory, the Applicant may only register the municipal name as a fourth level Domain Name. Municipal Domain Names cannot be transferred to any other party without CIRA’s prior, written consent; and
Click to expand...
We don't use the list in a dynamic context, we use it as it was when we first established the policy (the applicable version) which is now out of date. We are examining a plan to release them all (that have not been registered) since there has been plenty of time to reserve them.
 
richard.schreier said:
We don't use the list in a dynamic context, we use it as it was when we first established the policy (the applicable version) which is now out of date. We are examining a plan to release them all (that have not been registered) since there has been plenty of time to reserve them.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. I did note the "applicable version" wording but thought that was intended to allow you guys to update the list as needed (if possible). Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
They can keep registering but these domains will get rejected:
Andrew whois:
1661377693744.png
 
It was Tucows or it’s affiliates the first time when I posted it. Now it’s Godaddy.

Thanks for the response Richard but this is getting a bit more embarrassing for all of us in this space.

The “Authority” as in CIRA should have the authority and restrictions in place to totally avoid all this happening ever again, unless in the case of a major hack.

We, the registrants, cannot be monitoring these individual registrations from time to time.

Would appreciate if CIRA can be proactive and not reactive in this kind of issues. Our expectation of the “Authority” is to run the system fool proof. I am sure you hear my heart in the right way and not as a criticism.

Thanks Richard.
 
Eby said:
It was Tucows or it’s affiliates the first time when I posted it. Now it’s Godaddy.

Thanks for the response Richard but this is getting a bit more embarrassing for all of us in this space.

The “Authority” as in CIRA should have the authority and restrictions in place to totally avoid all this happening ever again, unless in the case of a major hack.

We, the registrants, cannot be monitoring these individual registrations from time to time.

Would appreciate if CIRA can be proactive and not reactive in this kind of issues. Our expectation of the “Authority” is to run the system fool proof. I am sure you hear my heart in the right way and not as a criticism.

Thanks Richard.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the comment Eby @Eby but I think we are the authority in this case and are performing as required. The system is fool proof in the sense it will allow registrations to proceed if they reflect the eligible registrant and will cause invalid registrations to be canceled. We can't prevent entities from trying to game our system with scripts that run 24/7 trying to capture specific strings on the off chance they become available. Their attempts will fail unless they are (or represent) the eligible registrant. And the system is open to allow such eligible registrations from any registrar.

The tools are in place for a RAR to determine whether a domain is subject to restrictions, but for many it may not be worthwhile for them to add in special processing like this just for CA. But the registry provides all that information in both the EPP return codes as well as in domain info responses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rlm
Thanks Richard for the explanation.

My other question would be then, has CIRA cancelled such registrations in mass scale after their own investigation other than when brought up by other Registrants?

I can understand the odd rejection request getting denied or cancelled due to 2nd level domain existence. I am also aware of the cancellation of TBR domains, when there were some issues with the submission practices by certain Registrars. We have lived through those in the past.

But has CIRA eventually cancelled such domain registrations without any others reporting them to CIRA?
 
richard.schreier said:
Thanks for the comment Eby @Eby but I think we are the authority in this case and are performing as required. The system is fool proof in the sense it will allow registrations to proceed if they reflect the eligible registrant and will cause invalid registrations to be canceled. We can't prevent entities from trying to game our system with scripts that run 24/7 trying to capture specific strings on the off chance they become available. Their attempts will fail unless they are (or represent) the eligible registrant. And the system is open to allow such eligible registrations from any registrar.

The tools are in place for a RAR to determine whether a domain is subject to restrictions, but for many it may not be worthwhile for them to add in special processing like this just for CA. But the registry provides all that information in both the EPP return codes as well as in domain info responses.
Click to expand...
Agreed - this is clearly a Registrar implementation issue. If you want to fix the problem, we should all use GoDaddy to attempt register domains that cannot be registered. Eventually, GoDaddy will realize that the level of support required to fix & refund these manual registrations will force them to actually fix the process. If it was my registrar, I would charge an additional non-refundable manual processing fee to attempt registrations that require CIRA approval. That should shut down domainers from attempting to register them quickly.
 
Eby said:
Thanks Richard for the explanation.

My other question would be then, has CIRA cancelled such registrations in mass scale after their own investigation other than when brought up by other Registrants?

I can understand the odd rejection request getting denied or cancelled due to 2nd level domain existence. I am also aware of the cancellation of TBR domains, when there were some issues with the submission practices by certain Registrars. We have lived through those in the past.

But has CIRA eventually cancelled such domain registrations without any others reporting them to CIRA?
Click to expand...
Eby @Eby I'm not sure I fully understand your question but will try to answer. Each registration that is subject to a restrictive usage (like a domain that is registered at the 3rd level richard.on.ca and is being requested at the 2nd richard.ca) is subject to a manual intervention/examination. We don't do anything in this context in mass scale. They are dealt with one at a time. It is cumbersome for us but is necessary to respect the prior rights of those domains registered at the 3rd and 4th levels per policy.

When you say "I can understand the odd rejection request getting denied or cancelled due to 2nd level domain existence."... this does not happen. If a domain is registered at the 2nd level, any attempt to register it again will fail with a message saying the domain is already registered or is unavailable. The TBR cancellations usually happen for one of two reasons: a technical glitch or an error in the create submission that cannot be fixed in real time.

Any domain registration that is subject to a usage restriction is managed by a special tag called a "Block with Override". The system automatically places these registrations in a holding state for manual review. If the review fails, the registration is cancelled. There is no input or reporting from "others".

I hope that answers your questions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Eby
Thanks Richard. Sorry I didn't make it clear enough for you. But you addressed the concerns I had, except for one, which is, if no one reported about Andrew.ca or about the last time when many of the restricted domains were registered, due to a glitch at CIRA, CIRA would have independently verified it and would have cancelled those registrations. Am I correct??

It's just that on both occasions, members here, who are vigilant brought it up first and then we saw CIRA acting on it. And it makes it even more cynical that someone or some entity would register the same domain, after it was registered, cancelled and now (as of the time of writing this) still remains registered, "pranking us" as esdiel mentioned.
 
Just check whois for official details. The Domain Status will indicate something isn't right. Know that any statuses starting with "server" are applied by the registry - not the kind of thing a domain typically has in a normal status. Statuses starting with "client" are set by the registrar - these are the locks most registrars allow you to manually apply yourself - or the registrar can use to enforce their own policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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

Sponsor
CanSpace
CIRA
FullHost
WHC
Donors (6)

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.

Members who recently read this topic: 4

Back
Top Bottom