Domain name owner #77
Comments
|
Prior to the creation of this role, this duty (domain name ownership) had been more-or-less included in the DNS Admin role (#18). It's good to separate it though, because while I'm playing the DNS Admin role, and I do have access to Namecheap (where Bisq domains are registered), I do not actually pay for their renewal. That's something Manfred has always done and is in fact currently doing. So Manfred, let's have you be primary here and I'll keep the login details and play the secondary. Good? Also, it's not just for the bisq.network domain, but also for bisq.io, bitsquare.io, etc. It would actually be good to enumerate which ones are under our control. I don't recall whether bisq.community is, for example. Ideally, these separate domains would be owned, maintained and paid for by the operators of those services. |
|
Here are the domains I own: |
Cycle 10 reportIt's been quite some time since regular reports have been made on this role, I'll pick up on doing that from this point forward. Nothing has changed with the domains that Manfred listed in the comment above. This remain owned by and paid for by him, and I retain access to the domain registrar where they are registered. Note that I recently purchased the bisq.wiki domain, and I am managing that at a separate registrar. I am not asking for compensation on that for now, until such time that the new wiki infrastructure has really been "delivered" in the sense that people know about it and are using it to good effect. Furthermore, I would like to see us split up and potentially eliminate this universal role for "domain name owner", and start having domain name ownership (and potentially DNS management) be the responsibility of each operator responsible for our different internet properties. e.g. the bisq.community domain name and DNS should ideally be owned and managed by the Forum Operator, etc. This is all toward our onging decentralization goals. There may still be a place for this general role, however, with regard to Bisq-related domain names that have been purchased but are not currently being used for any given property. We'll follow up more on this in the Roles cleanup project that's currently underway at bisq-network/admin#3. Also, I need to get bonded for this role, which will also happen as part of that cleanup effort. |
Cycle 12 reportJust to acknowledge it, I missed my report for Cycle 11. There has been no activity to report in any case. I did, however, just create bisq-network/proposals#211 to eliminate this role altogether, which, among other benefits, will allow @ManfredKarrer to unlock his bond, and will avoid the need for me to post one. |
Cycle 12 report (continued)The proposal I mentioned above to eliminate this role was flawed for reasons pointed out in the comments at bisq-network/proposals#211. I'll be withdrawing it shortly. In the meantime, @ManfredKarrer remains the owner of this role and will continue being responsible for renewing the domain names he owns until further notice. I'll also post a bond since I have access to the Namecheap account. |
|
Can you also include these domains in the role? We need to reserve them so nobody makes phishing scams
|
|
I grabbed bsq.network a while back for that exact reason. If interested, I can transfer ownership of that domain so it is controlled by this role. |
These are all already reserved and redirects have been set up for them for quite a while. Not sure there's anything to do here. |
In the spirit of eventually eliminating the need for this role, or reducing it as much as possible, I wouldn't want to do this. "Domain name holder" should be read as "holder of domains that can't easily have their ownership decentralized". This role is sitting on top of several non-mission critical domains for historical reasons, but I wouldn't want to start adding to that list. Each new domain someone wants to reserve and sit on is something that should probably get voted on as part of normal compensation. If you want to hold onto bsq.network and request compensation for it on a yearly basis or whatever, I think that's fine, but it's not obvious to me which domains are really "worth it" and which aren't. I'd rather leave that to the DAO. |
Cycle 13 reportNothing to report. |
Cycle 14 reportThis may be my last cycle report as Domain Name Owner as I am stepping away from the project. It remains to be seen whether I will continue to own this role for a while or not; I need to speak with @ManfredKarrer about it. It should be noted that I do actually own or manage renewals of the domains owned by this account; I merely have access to the account where they are managed (so as to be able to make DNS server changes, etc). |
Cycle 15 reportI will continue to own this role for the time being. Nothing to report this cycle. |
Role ownership update@ManfredKarrer and I have just agreed to remove me as the secondary owner for this role. The main reason is that two people having access to the Namecheap account where our domains are managed means that 2FA is not an option. Manfred has enabled 2FA and I no longer have access. I will initiate unlocking my bond now, and will remove myself as an assignee to this role issue; I will no longer post cycle updates here. |
Bonded role for the owner of the bisq.network domain
Primary role owner: @ManfredKarrer
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: