ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [ga] Replacements for VeriSign registry?

  • To: admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: RE: [ga] Replacements for VeriSign registry?
  • From: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:06:51 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: "'George Kirikos'" <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>, <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <288901c3c0fe$8b75df90$988c2e44@CJ52269B>
  • Reply-to: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, admin wrote:

> The domain name database is small compared to these.  I believe Tucows said
> they could run the registry for about $2 per name instead of $6.  

An interesting measure is how much it would cost if ICANN were to drop the
10 year maximum registration period.  My guess is that without the burden
of billing the cost of providing the service could be made extremely low.

For instance, I bet that I could make money doing registrations for one
time charge of $25 for a period of 100 years.  (I'd probably have a $5,
COLA adjusted, service charge for each update of the NS and contact
records for the registration.)

(At the other end of the spectrum, ICANN's arbitrary rule that
registrations can't be shorter than one year has eliminated the possibly
of registries that deal in short-terms names, such as might be used for
movies or candidates or parties or other ephemerial stuff.)

(These minimum and maximum periods were adopted with zero discussion, zero
debate, zero justification, zero explaination, zero anything.)

		--karl--





<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>