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

["Robert F. Connelly" <BobC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 04:34 PM 2/8/2008 Friday  +0000, Rob Hall wrote:

Dear Rob: Your comments are very helpful and pertinent.  Regards, BobC

>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

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After all is said and done ---
A lot more gets said than done;-}