RE: Re[2]: [ga] Re: VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

Roberto,

There is and will continue to be clear separation between the VeriSign
Registry and VeriSign Registrar regardless of how much people refuse to
believe it.

Chuck

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:roberto_gaetano@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 8:17 PM
> To: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: [ga] Re: VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??
> 
> 
> Chuck Gomes wrote:
> >
> >Since 1996, there have been potential domain name holders who have
> >requested some sort of wait list service in case domain names are
> >released into the available pool.  The service at the registrar level
> >was a response to this demand.  Putting the service at the registry
> >level improves the value of the service for potential registrants.
> 
> The more I think about this, the less I like it.
> In 1996 the situation was rather different, as there was no 
> distinction 
> between the Registrar and the Registry.
> One of the pillars of a healthy competition was, IMHO, the 
> separation of the 
> roles (you might remember that for this very reason I did 
> strongly oppose 
> the new contract allowing Verisign to do both for .com).
> Here we have yet another proof of how unwise was that choice, 
> because there 
> is an obvious (to me, at least) conflict of interest between 
> the Registrar 
> and the Registry in offering competing services.
> Incidentally, if Verisign (the Registry) registers an expired 
> name to the 
> first-in-queue, skipping the Registrars, who will be the 
> Registrar that will 
> be commercially in contact with the Registrant for future 
> services? Or will 
> Verisign (the Registry) operate also as Registrar, and this 
> independently 
> from Verisign (the Registrar)? Obviously, to have Verisign 
> (the Registrar) 
> inheriting the Registrar function for the Registrants in the 
> queues operated 
> by Verisign (the Registry) will be unfair practice.
> 
> >
> >The value to the Internet community therefore seems rather obvious to
> >me. But, if there is none as you suggest, then the service will be a
> >failure.  On the other hand, if there is demand and hence 
> value, it will
> >succeed.  The level of success will depend on how much 
> demand and value
> >there is.  The best way to test it is to let the market 
> prove it one way
> >or other.
> 
> I disagree that the commercial success should be the only measure.
> Let's take the extreme example of the smugglers of cigarettes 
> and spirits: 
> they provide a doubtless value to the customers by selling 
> directly foreign 
> goods, skipping part of the value chain that will include 
> resellers and 
> taxes, but the commercial success is not a good enough reason 
> to allow the 
> practice.
> 
> Regards
> Roberto
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
> http://www.hotmail.com
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

smime.p7s