[registrars] Verisign Batch pool issue - further considerations based upon comments

["Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

Many of you have commented on the verisign batch pool issue and orignal
mails by some of us. I myself had overlooked certain aspects - as have been
pointed out by Paul and Jordyn. It is therefore essential to try and first
list objectives and then test any possible solution against those objectives

For me the objectives are as follows

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES
==================

- Any proposed solution should solve the phantom creds issue

- If indeed Verisign is impacted by the batch pool pounding, then any
proposed solution should resolve that issue also

- Any proposed solution should not differentiate or put undue advantage to
larger registrars as opposed to smaller. It is not only essential to do this
from a fair play perspective, it is also important to realize that this is a
contractual requirement

ANCILIARY OBJECTIVES
====================

- Any proposed solution should not impact ICANN's budget in any detrimental
fashion if possible

- A proposed solution should not result in huge outflow of money for people
who wish to participate in this market

- A propsoed solution should allow for everyone to be able to participate
equally. It should not raise the barriers of participation to a level where
it does not allow new entrants to the field

Please comment on the above and let me know if this seems fair

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
--------------------------------------