.org domain registry problems?

Are you having trouble registering or transferring .org domains?

[theface]

Hi,

I was in the midst of transferring a client's .org domain to another registrar today when I discovered the following record in the WHOIS:

Domain ID:D4920144-LROR
Domain Name:DOMAINNAMECHANGED.ORG
Created On:16-May-1996 04:00:00 UTC
Last Updated On:20-Mar-2002 15:47:23 UTC
Expiration Date:17-May-2003 04:00:00 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:R63-LROR
Status:OK
Registrant ID:63-C
Registrant Name:CONTACT NOT AUTHORITATIVE
Registrant Street1:Whois Server:whois.networksolutions.com
Registrant Street2:Referral URL:www.networksolutions.com
Registrant City:N/A
Registrant Postal Code:N/A
Registrant Country:CA
Registrant Email:[e-mail]
Admin ID:63-C
Admin Name:CONTACT NOT AUTHORITATIVE
Admin Street1:Whois Server:whois.networksolutions.com
Admin Street2:Referral URL:www.networksolutions.com
Admin City:N/A
Admin Postal Code:N/A
Admin Country:CA
Admin Email:[e-mail]
Billing ID:63-C
Billing Name:CONTACT NOT AUTHORITATIVE
Billing Street1:Whois Server:whois.networksolutions.com
Billing Street2:Referral URL:www.networksolutions.com
Billing City:N/A
Billing Postal Code:N/A
Billing Country:CA
Billing Email:[e-mail]
Tech ID:63-C
Tech Name:CONTACT NOT AUTHORITATIVE
Tech Street1:Whois Server:whois.networksolutions.com
Tech Street2:Referral URL:www.networksolutions.com
Tech City:N/A
Tech Postal Code:N/A
Tech Country:CA
Tech Email:[e-mail]
Name Server:B.NS.INTERLAND.NET
Name Server:C.NS.INTERLAND.NET
Name Server:A.NS.INTERLAND.NET

You'll probably note that I've changed the domain name here, but if you try a WHOIS on a number of reasonably respectable WHOIS sites (I tried, NSI, Domain Bank, Enom.com), you will get this for almost every .org domain name. Has anyone else noticed this problem, or am I going insane?

My client wants to start the transfer process, so I hope this isn't permanent. Could the PRI .org registry transfer have anything to do with this? Any ideas?

[hakre]

hi theface,

maybe this is a tweaky anonymous option? ;-) hope this is only a temporary prob, because i'd like to transfer some soon. maybe this is also because of the sql slammer stuff and they checkup their databases....

[teeceo]

"Could the PRI .org registry transfer have anything to do with this? Any ideas?" Thats it in a nutshell. They said no activate for 3-4 months and they slammed the door on all movement.

teeceo

[GeorgeGG]

They have a 2 part whois, like the com/net thing where you
have to get the Whois Server (Whois Server:whois.?.?) for the
second whois.
Sticky for a updated web based whois that works with .org

GeorgeGG

[ritch_b]

The 'contact not authoratative' is shown when you do a whois on a third party server and in order to get the full record, you'll need to run the whois at the actual Registrar itself.

So (in theory!) if the domain is with NetSol, the only way to see the full record is to run a whois using NetSol's service and not any other third party whois. If you do the whois from say, PIR's whois, you'll see the 'contact not authoratative' as their whois server is not the authoratative whois server.

Hope that makes sense - can't say I do Monday mornings v.well.:)

R.

[GeorgeGG]

I don't do Midnights very well also :)

So in practice for wiget.org domain, do
'whois -h whois.publicinterestregistry.net wigit.org'
and if the result contains the line
'Whois Server:whois.#####.###'
don't show the result, parse out the whois server and do
'whois -h whois.#####.### domain.org'
and show the result.

That is what I tried to say about a 2 part whois.

GeorgeGG

[dingman]

Whether you have this problem right now depends on your registrar, though it does seem to me that *most* .org domains have it. PIR tells me that it's my registrar's fault. My registrar has a (formal) policy of not answering most e-mail, so they tell me nothing. Use the Whois server that appears in the street address field for these broken records and you get the correct information, as GeorgeGG said.

Asfor the two-part whois, that's standard anymore. It's just that most whois clients follow the reference to a second whois server contained in the first response you get, but PIR, for whatever reason, doesn't usually format the reference in a way that the whois clients can recognize. Like I said, they claim this isn't their fault.

[GeorgeGG]

doesn't usually format the reference in a way that the whois clients can recognize.

Only took 2 lines of code to handle the format...

GeorgeGG

But it was at least week before I knew about the change :)

[dingman]

Not saying it's impossible to handle, by any means. But your changes don't seem to have propagated to my installation yet ;)