ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

Re: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model - proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg

  • To: "Marcus Faure" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Jay Westerdal <jwesterdal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model - proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg
  • From: "Ross Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 08:46:36 -0400
  • Cc: "'Tim Ruiz'" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, registrars@xxxxxxxx
  • In-reply-to: <200505310823.j4V8N3If030812@brian.voerde.globvill.de>
  • References: <200505310823.j4V8N3If030812@brian.voerde.globvill.de>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not seeing why this is our problem. A precious few are exploiting a loophole in the system and there is no real damage or loss to other registrars.

Why again do we care?

I know I argued the opposite in Argentina, but after talking more about this with Rob, I just simply don't see what the fuss is about.

If the registries want to do something about this, OTOH, I can easily understand why they would want to do something about it - but from my perspective, registrars have a lot on their plate already and taking on someone else's work just simply doesn't make a lot of sense to me...

On Tue, 31 May 2005 10:23:03 +0200 (CEST)
 "Marcus Faure" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I second Jay's proposal. A quota on the abuse period can solve this problem, just like it could solve the "add commend" issue we discussed in Capetown.


I would suggest that the solution is a fee to delete within 5 days. Something like 75 cents. For those that registering 100,000 domains in a day it would curb their appetite from trying them out for free. And for those that made a true mistake it would allow them delete with a small processing fee. Since typos happen, it may be more prudent to allow registrars that successful keeps domains longer then 5 days to get a ratio of free deletes.

I would suggest 1 free delete per 200 domains successfully and newly registered longer then 5 days. I would love to see some more discussion about this and then by Friday I would like to propose a formal motion along
these lines.

The abuse is huge. Over 750K domains were registered in one day the other week! Then almost all were deleted in the 5 day free abuse period.

Jay Westerdal
Name Intelligence, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 9:58 AM
To: Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model -
proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg


The add grace period abuse needs to be addressed separately. I see no benefit in dilluting that issue by labeling it a business model.

This practice has broad and complicated implications that we would have
to resolve first, IP infringement for example.

I really think the AGP is a seperate discussion.


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [registrars] Variations on the current domain name model -
> proposed registrar workshop for Luxembourg
> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, May 29, 2005 9:44 pm
> To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> > Hello All, > > The dominant model for domain names across com/net/org/biz/info etc, > consists of registering a domain name for a fixed fee for one year, up > to 10 years. There is no registry discount for multiple years. There > is a grace period of 5 days, where a name can be registered, and then > deleted for a refund. This is presently being used for domain name > buyers that want to attempt to measure the traffic associated with a > particular name, and then decide whether to keep. It is effectively > being treated as a 5 day free trial, rather than a grace period to
> account for registration mistakes.
> > I believe it is time that we saw some changes in the dominant model - > towards a choice of models that match the characteristics of different
> markets.
> > Here are some example markets: > (1) Corporates - they want to register a name for up to 10 years, and > tend to operate their own DNS and hosting infrastructure. The current
> model suits this market best.
> > (2) Web hosting companies - they want to bundle a domain name with > hosting. A model where a name can be registered for a 30 day period,
> with auto-renewal might suit their business model.
> > (3) Domain name owners that monetise names via pay-per-click traffic. A > model where there is a longer "free trial" period may be of interest. > > I propose that we have a workshop at Luxembourg - similar to the > workshop that proposed different approaches to resolving contention for > deleted names - that invites ideas on different domain name models that > could be offered at the registry. These would be new registry services > and would need approval from ICANN, and would need to be available to
> all registrars.
> > Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin

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