Re: [registrars] Proposed short term solution to registry contention

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Bruce,

> (1) Registry implement auction mode for deleted names where there is
> more than one registrar wishing to register the same name

My preference today <registrar hat==on> is for registrars to "own" the
"deleted front-end". My preference tomorrow <registry hat==on> may not
be the same. I suspect I'll always want vgrs not to implement the auction
mode.

> (2) Auction funds to be placed in an escrow account ...

Fine. $6 for registry so they don't care. Done.

Whoever owns it (the "deleted front-end") can pay for it, no point in
tying it to some internal vgrs accounting bogosity.

This opens a can of worms, in theory. First-come-first-served for new
buys, and something else for expiry buys. However, we need to do some
thing if we are going to remain with a secondary market with registrars
remaining the sales channels.

We have two groups pursuing different shared fates, the registrars with
declining per-share values and the aggregators with constant sets-of-shares
values. Between the arms race by competing aggregators and ICANN having 
unconditional revenue-generating accreditations, secondary actors (both
aggregators and ICANN) are doing better off of the market than registrars.

Cheers,
Eric