ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


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

[ga] Queue-Jumping

  • To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: [ga] Queue-Jumping
  • From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 18:14:33 -0800 (PST)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=kJMRAzRPMD7Mxugtphk8EkXfphUBflljYSpSOqulZivN0qHCsfmwbHs2awNkTQ6Qi45w+R8Q1dI52asfQz+cfC19wtX8xorVunbn+QrCEcKYmhRnotA2XIDZn1va/haurN/lb5Cw4vW1JV+mw07v1f8GuNYm+hKO+CWXi1V+KJU= ;
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I had another look at a long but informative article
written by Richard Henderson, "New TLDS:  The Long and
Winding Road" which appears at
http://www.icannwatch.org/essays/henderson1.html and
elsewhere.

Among other issues, Richard described the abuse of
registrar privilege that occurred in round-robin
queues, where some registrars simply queue-jumped by
submitting extremely short lists for themselves.  

I'm extremely worried that the problem will become
substantially worse in the next TLD round as we now
also have to contend with the phenomenon of a hundred
plus phantom registrars (you'll recall that Jennifer
Ross-Carriere is listed as the contact for 98
different accredited registrars that at the moment
primarily play in the drop pool).

I'm expecting to see the next round of TLD
introductions (if it includes a batch of generic tlds)
gamed to the hilt with short lists unless the GNSO
acts to establish some constraints in advance.  

Does anyone have a recollection of the outcome of the
registrar discussions on this topic at the Luxembourg session?


		
__________________________________________ 
Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about. 
Just $16.99/mo. or less. 
dsl.yahoo.com 




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