RE: [registrars] wls and domain expiraion dates (9/11)

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This highlights the need for ICANN to meet with both the registry
operator and registrar representatives in crafting the final conditions
for the new service to prevent gaming of the system.  Ie the WLS has
never been through an "implementation" committee process.

Regards,
Bruce


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Stahura [mailto:stahura@xxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Friday, 8 August 2003 2:41 AM
> To: 'Rick Wesson'; Registrars List
> Cc: halloran@xxxxxxxxx; twomey@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [registrars] wls and domain expiraion dates (9/11)
> 
> 
> Even if the registry published the data, only the registrar of record 
> knows that the registrant did not renew.  No matter what the 
> registry publishes, the registrar-of-record knows this 
> information *first*, and therefore can offer the WLS at lower 
> risk (or at a zero price) first.  That is why condition "C" 
> exists. Condition "C" must change because it allows the 
> registrar-of-record to disclose the information to another 
> registrar and *that* registrar is allowed to purchase the WLS 
> during the black-out period.  That is why the blackout period 
> must cover all registrars, not just the registrar-of-record.  
> Another reason why condition c must change is that the 
> blackout period needs to be known before the name deletes and 
> not depend on a future event such as the name actually 
> deleting, which is the point Verisign brought up in their 
> request for reconsideration. The only question remaining is 
> when and how long should the blackout period be?  I wrote a 
> paper on it, which is at 
> http://www.icannwatch.org/essays/icann-wls3c.doc 
> If the blackout period does not cover a period before a name 
> expires until the name is available again for registration, 
> (say the blackout period ends short of availability, which is 
> not what I advocated in my paper) 
> then it probably should be combined with information 
> disclosure by the registry at a time before 
> the blackout period ends, but if that is the case it 
> introduces other problems such as registry EPP (WLS uses EPP) 
> loading. But that may be acceptable to all parties because a 
> period that ends 
> before name-availability would probably not diminish WLS sales.
> 
> I would like to meet with Paul Twomey or his designee (Dan?) 
> and anyone else who is interested, to discuss the "tailoring" 
> of condition c that the ICANN board has authorized the ICANN 
> staff to undertake. I believe we can reach a compromise to 
> insure fairness among registrars and that WLS supporters can 
> live with.  
> I would like to work with ICANN (not happening at the moment) 
> and companies on both sides of the issue (is happening) to 
> reach agreement on condition "c".
> 
> It is a complicated issue, and that for me at least, requires 
> much thought, and certain changes, I am certain, will lead to 
> unintended negative consequences such as the registry's whois 
> system being loaded as you point out below or unfairness 
> among registrars as I point out, and/or other negatives. As 
> it stands now, "c" maximizes 2 negatives: 1) registrar 
> unfairness and 2) registry whois pounding If anyone would 
> like to discuss it more, please send me an email or call.
> 
> Paul
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@xxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:23 PM
> To: Registrars List
> Cc: halloran@xxxxxxxxx; twomey@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [registrars] wls and domain expiraion dates (9/11)
> 
> 
> 
> While pondering marketing WLS, I realized that for a perfect 
> market in WLS to arise registrars will need to know the 
> expiration date for all domains with a potential to be 
> deleted durring the WLS test.
> 
> Will the registry be making available a list of all domains 
> deleting in the next 12 months and their expiration date? If 
> this information is not available the registrars with many 
> domains (network solutions, tucows, register.com, melborne 
> it) deleting in that period will have an advantage over 
> registrars with smaller portfolios. Thus the big players will 
> have an advantage of pre-knowlege on which domains to market 
> WLS subscriptions for.
> 
> For a complete and fair market to develop all domains and 
> their expiration dates should be made available at least 30 
> days before the launch so that there is enough time to market 
> the WLS subscriptions, for those domains with a likely hood 
> of expiration in the 12 month period, and other domains that 
> will be deleted before their expiration date.
> 
> Understand that the precedent of a current list of domain 
> pending delete ensures a fair and level market in deleted 
> domains. logic would follow that a list current of domains in 
> .com and .net and their expiration date will be required by 
> registrars marketing WLS.
> 
> If this information is not desiminated there could be an 
> increased load in the registry whois servers as registrar, 
> resellers and speculators mine the registry whois to obtain 
> the information thus creating an advantage for those that 
> violate agreements against automated whois queries.
> 
> I am not sure that the registry has the authority to 
> desiminate the information of a registrars domains currently 
> under management and their respective expiration date as some 
> public companies guard this information. It is my belief that 
> it should be ICANN that publishes this data as to remove any 
> liability from the registry.
> 
> To prevent whois data mining, unfair and ineffective markets 
> in WLS, please consider this a formal request for ICANN to 
> publish a list of all domains in .com and .net and their 
> associated expiration date, to be published before Sept 11 
> 2003, so that registrars may effectively market WLS 
> subscriptions in a fair and competitive market.
> 
> 
> best,
> 
> Rick Wesson
> CEO, Alice's Registry, Inc.
>