Re: [registrars] Verisign batch pool advisory
Does anyone have the original email from Verisign? If so, could you please send it along? Thanks... Jim--On Wednesday, September 29, 2004 12:26 AM +0530 Bhavin Turakhia <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi all, Works been a lil hectic - and I am gonna be out travelling most of the next 2-3 weeks. However here is one of the first agenda that needs our attention Verisign had sent out a batch pool Advisory note proposing two solutions for the batch pool as follows - 1. One measure would require registrars to keep automated batch pool processing within reasonable limits. Specifically, registrars would be required to not exceed a maximum ratio of total transactions for every successful transaction. <snip> 2. A second option we are considering is providing capacity to the batch pool on a fee basis, which would be available to all registrars. For a fixed monthly charge per single connection <snip> Both the above solutions in their current proposed form are very raw and their implications need to be studied in detail. For instance I can see several implications instantly * In case of option (1) the larger registrars have an advantage since they have a greater number of transactions * In case of option (2) companies with deeper pockets have an advantage, and more importantly this will lead to a status quo situation where noone will make money except verisign since everyone will be buying conections until it reaches a point where everyone is just abt covering their costs * if option (1) is adopted icann will fail to meet its budget since all registrars will be below the 1:200 ratio and therefore all of us will meet the forgiveness criteria laid out in the budget * there is other implications to aspects like - does this qualify as a registry service? etc I would like to be able to do the following - * I think we should send an email to Verisign asking them for some more time to draft out an official response from the constituency as well as have individual registrars who have not yet had the time to pen out their thoughts send them in. This is very important since none of us have had enuf time to respond to this and the constituency has not had enuf time to figure out a response either * I would like everyone to post their concerns about both the above solutiobns and any suggested modifications you may have for these * I would like to have people volunteer to form a small group to study all the implications and issues * I would like to have people assist in drafting out a response from the constituency's perspective. While I know we may not be able to achieve consensus since all of us may have different ideas, it is atleast important to pen down our collective concerns and see if we can figure out a solution or atleast bring to Verisign's attention the potential problems with these 2 solutions Ummm ..... I think thts all for now :) Help me get the ball rolling Best Regards Bhavin Turakhia Founder, CEO and Chairman DirectI -------------------------------------- http://www.directi.com Direct Line: +91 (22) 5679 7600 Direct Fax: +91 (22) 5679 7510 Board Line (USA): +1 (415) 240 4172 Board Line (India): +91 (22) 5679 7500 --------------------------------------
|