.org Registry Offline - Not 224
einer writes "According to the The Register, the registry containing all of the .org tld information has fallen off the planet. The article is light on details, and doesn't list any potential consequences. " It looks like it's the server that maintains the records for who owns what .org domain - and a big "I Told You So" for Verisign. And of course, now it seems to be working just fine. Good work, PIR.
Don't hit OSS (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's mine (Score:3, Interesting)
[whois.crsnic.net]
Whois Server Version 1.3
Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.
No match for "SLASHDOT.ORG".
>>> Last update of whois database: Mon, 19 May 2003 06:05:55 EDT <<<
The day .org died - or anyone want slashdot.org? (Score:5, Interesting)
not quite as bad as the day the internet died as all it means in real terms is a few people will try to buy domain names that arn't available.
anyone want to buy slashdot.org?
http://www.domaincity.co.uk/cgi-bin/whois.pl?ty
it seems to be for sale, or maybe not
sparkes
Show Me The Money! (Score:2, Interesting)
Seriously... Are registry services going to see fallout due to having to reverse and refund erroneous .org registrations that their servers processed during the outage? This might also depend upon whether their scripts depend upon the PIR servers, and whether the scripts distinguish between "error" and "domain not registered" conditions.
PostgreSQL (Score:0, Interesting)
Boston data line cut (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Don't hit OSS (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:whois still working (Score:5, Interesting)
I never got paged about it, and I certainly would have had things gone down.
It seems more plausible that the problem stems from an out-of-date version of whois.
Version 4.6.2 (released in March) introduced a "patch" redirecting .ORG requests to whois.publicinterestregistry.net ; I'd suggest you check version numbers. Chances are that you're running something reasonably new.
It's plausible that VGRS might have been forwarding requests over to PIR, and shut that capability off this weekend, thereby causing "some inconvenience" to those using out-of-date whois clients.
Taking a look at the posts that led to the Register article, it appears that they headed down a garden path rather like this:
Alternatively, perhaps CRSNIC, the putative point of failure, is having a problem?