RE: [registrars] WG: [council] Domain Tasting Design Team Proposed GNSO Council Motion

["Rob Hall" <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ross,

I am concerned about percentages, as it allows registrars that are
larger to offer services that the smaller ones can not.  For example, a
large registrar could offer tasting still, because of their size based
on the percentage system.

So I prefer just a flat number that we are all allowed.  It should be
large enough so the biggest can deal with their fraud etc.  Even a large
number will stop the millions of domains being tasted if that is the
goal.

But I am also mindful of the fact that there should be an extraordinary
ability should something go wrong.  Lets say you had a system run amok
that was supposed to be pointing at the testbed servers, and instead was
pointing at production.  Or you had someone bang away at your systems
with bad credit cards and register a million names over night.  Our
systems are typically automated, and someone could do a fair bit of
damage in a short time if so inclined.  While we program to prevent
that, nothing is hack proof.

So I think there needs to be a mechanism, perhaps not automatic, where
someone looks at it and says "this truly was fraud or a mistake" and
then allows the free deletion. This can certainly be a one off type of
thing.  It should exist perhaps at the ICANN level for the 20 cent fees,
and should also apply to any registry funnel approved type of action.  I
am not sure I want it left only in the hands of a Registry to decide, as
they are the ones that profit from our mistakes.  

So it needs to be a simple process that a Registrar can prove a problem
and get forgiveness.

Rob.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Rader
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 10:57 AM
To: Jeffrey Eckhaus
Cc: Thomas Keller; registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Adrian Kinderis
Subject: Re: [registrars] WG: [council] Domain Tasting Design Team
Proposed GNSO Council Motion



On 8-Feb-08, at 9:39 AM, Jeffrey Eckhaus wrote:

> If another registrar that you mentioned has the half the fraud the
> GoDaddy has, maybe 5,000 domains in a given month, but only has 50,000
> net adds per month then their percentage of returns is much higher,  
> even
> though they are suffering less fraud or other returns than GoDaddy.


They would lose their merchant account before they got to this point.

Let's be realistic - there's absolutely no practical reasons to set  
the thresholds that high unless we are baking in a carve-out for a  
small amount of tasting each month.

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
t. 416.538.5492
c. 416.828.8783
http://www.domaindirect.com

"To solve the problems of today, we must focus on tomorrow."
- Erik Nupponen