RE: [registrars] Motion for a Vote on Grace Period Deletion Fee

[dwascher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Rob and Jay,
A couple of years ago with several of our partners we engaged in a 24 hour
add and delete method for the testing of domains. As long as our VeriSign
account was high enough we would register several thousand domains and then
delete. Very shortly VeriSign came down on us quoting the Registry -
Registrar agreements and our compliance

3.2(ii) "enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that send
queries or data to the system of Registry Operator or any ICANN- Accredited
Registrar, except as reasonably necessary to register domain or modify
existing registrations"

VeriSign also complained that this was a burden on there accounting folks to
keep track of the adds and deletes. After 3 months we had to comply with the
"Cease and Desist" order but our partner kept about 10K domains out of 150K.
I even tried to explain to VeriSign that they were getting more new
registration because of this. At the end we offered to pay a fee for doing
this on top of the registration - but doing - this practice was hurting the
registration system.

Now it seems that others are getting away with this practice and VeriSign is
not doing anything about it. I am NOT in favor of a .25 cent fee for doing
this method since it seems that the Registry's (VeriSign) does not wish to
engage in this practice.

Leave the deletion policy as it stands!!!

Thanks,
David Wascher
IARegistry

::-----Original Message-----
::From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
::[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jay Westerdal
::Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 7:15 PM
::To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
::Subject: RE: [registrars] Motion for a Vote on Grace Period Deletion Fee
::
::
::Rob,
::I did some math calculations to see how many domains could be registered
::for free in that five day window. Infinity x $0.00 = $0.00. That is truly
::scary.
::
::I am not trying to take away the rights of Registrars, I am trying to
::close a loop-hole. The intended use of the 5 day grace was to allow
::for production testing and for registrants to delete typos. I am
::trying to move more toward the spirit of the clause as it was originally
::designed. I can see the progression of this activity towards one where
::the more creative registrars buys or starts a Bank so they can issue
::their own letter of credit to Verisign for 6 Billion dollars. Then the
::next day we have 1 Billion more .com domains and every four days after
::that we see them cycling. Then the next registrar gets more creative and
::issues themselves a 600 Billion Dollar letter of credit and then we
::escalate to 100 Billion domains every four days. Oh, I wish the language
::was more clear in the being, but I recognize the spirit of the contract
::and I am simply trying to get us to the point of no free domains. I
::would be fine if Verisign wanted to sell domains on a shorter window.
::But the operative word is sell. I am all for 30 day $0.50 domains or
::whatever they want to try. Heck even $0.01 for a day registration so long
::as there is money involved.
::
::The ratio model is the only model that scales, large registrars have
::more typos. It is really simple.
::
::Jay Westerdal
::Name Intelligence, Inc.
::http://www.nameintelligence.com
::
::PS: It only takes about 25 Million in the US Funds and about 6 months of
::paperwork to start your own bank in the US.
::
::-----Original Message-----
::From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
::[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Hall
::Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 3:10 PM
::To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
::Subject: RE: [registrars] Motion for a Vote on Grace Period Deletion Fee
::
::Jay,
::
::I am concerned that you are attempting to take away a right that
::Registrars
::currently have because it does not suit your Registrars business model.
::
::Registrars have many different business models, and the market
::should decide
::what ones work, and what ones do not. That is what competition is
::about. An
::attempt such as yours to decide which ones should or should not be allowed
::might be seen as anti-competitive or anti-trust.  As a
::constituency, we have
::been warned in the past we must be careful when discussing or voting in
::large groups to the detriment of other member Registrars, especially where
::it involves our costs or artificially raising the prices of goods in
::collusion as a group.
::
::Your suggestion also treats registrars differently, giving the large
::registrars a leg up over smaller ones.
::
::You are, in effect, also suggesting changing all of our contracts with the
::Registry, something that I for one do not take lightly.
::
::It also would seem from earlier comments by others, that there is not
::consensus on this.  I think a comment from Champ implied that the
::add grace
::period was bad, because it allowed someone to have a domain for a
::period of
::time without paying for it.  One might also argue that the 45 day grace
::period after expiration does exactly the same thing.  Registrants and
::Registrars have the use of the domain for 45 days, and can then cancel it
::without paying for those 45 days (a period over 9 times longer
::than the add
::grace period).  Are you also suggesting that we get rid of this 45 day
::period ?  Or apply a fee for using the domain during it as well ?
:: Perhaps a
::domain should automatically go into the RGP period the day after
::expiry.  I
::would think that many small Registrars might see what is happening with
::Registrars using the 45 day period to measure traffic, and then sell the
::domains to only their clients as an abuse of that grace period, even worse
::than registering a domain and deleting it in the initial add period.   One
::might think that the argument about taking a domain out of circulation so
::that other registrars can not register it would be far worse during the 45
::day period, than the initial 5 day one.
::
::It has also been suggested that it would solve the "contention" issue, but
::frankly, this is a red herring.  Verisign has stated publicly
::that they are
::able to handle the batch pool loads just fine.  Additionally, as someone
::pointed out earlier, these adds have nothing to do with the batch
::pool, nor
::loads on the registry.  There is no pounding of the Registry
::occurring here.
::I would bet that there are not even any duplicate commands being
::sent, as is
::what happens during the deletion drop.  The Registry processes tens of
::millions of requests a day.  I would think they would be happy to
::process as
::many add commands as you could give them.  I agree with Ross,
::that there are
::already market forces in play that limit someone just adding tens of
::millions of names a day.
::
::Personally, I do not condone a Registrar adding a domain, deleting it, and
::then adding the same one, then deleting it, then adding the same one,
::effectively having the domain for free forever.  But there are easier ways
::to deal with this type of activity.  For example, one could limit how many
::times the SAME domain could be add-deleted at a given registrar. I also
::suspect that the activity of keeping a domain for free forever is not what
::is really occurring here.
::
::Alternately, you could allow domains to be registered by the
::month.  So that
::for 1/12th of the registration cost (ie: 50 cents), a domain could be
::registered for one month. I believe Verisign already allows a domain to be
::extended for a month at this price, so why not allow it to be
::registered for
::a month initially at that price.  But if we are to start down
::this path, it
::needs careful discussion and planning, not a quick snap motion.
::
::I recall in Argentina that Chuck Gomes pointed out that a high number of
::domains had been registered, and that a high percentage of names had been
::deleted.  However, when you look at the domains that were kept,
::it was well
::over a million dollars worth of business to the Registry.  Are
::you sure that
::you want to be taking this money away from the Registry ?  Is it our place
::as Registrars to do this ?
::
::Currently, my contract with the Registry allows me to offer a
::five day grace
::period to my customers, so that if they decide they don't want a
::domain they
::have already paid for, they can delete it.  For you to suggest taking away
::that right, because you don't want me to offer it to my clients as a value
::added service, is simply wrong.
::
::I suggest you tread very carefully here, and you may want to re-consider
::your motion.
::
::Rob.
::
::-----Original Message-----
::From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
::[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jay Westerdal
::Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 5:29 PM
::To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
::Subject: [registrars] Motion for a Vote on Grace Period Deletion Fee
::
::I official propose a mandatory deletion fee at the Registry.
::The fee would go directly to the Registry.
::
::Registrars must pay a $0.25 fee on every delete that takes place
::in the five
::day Grace Period that exceeds 200 per month or 1% of the
::registration volume
::from the previous month whichever is greater.
::
::I need 4 more registrars to support the motion to bring this to a vote.
::
::Jay Westerdal
::Name Intelligence, Inc.
::http://www.nameintelligence.com
::
::