DNSO Mailling lists archives


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

Re: [ga] For those interested in delete games

  • To: <ga@dnso.org>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] For those interested in delete games
  • From: Bret Fausett <baf@fausett.com>
  • Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 21:58:47 -0800
  • In-Reply-To: <B85FB7FC.DED6%baf@fausett.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@dnso.org
  • User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/

> I request the community to develop a concise list of requirements for
> proposals to solve the issues with a registry deleting domains names in
> batch.

Rick, from the perspective of a registrant, here are some features that
would be nice:

  (a) a registrant's chance at a name should not increase by paying a fee to
more than one registrar or submitting more than one application (with a
single registrar or multiple registrars);

  (b) a registrant should not have to visit a registrar's site multiple
times in order to obtain a deleting domain name. (This places some
constraints around an auction model, which, depending on how it were
implemented, might require a registrant to monitor the auction in order to
place successive higher bids. It doesn't foreclose an auction model though);

  (c) by looking at the expiration date on the whois record of the desired
name, a prospective registrant should have some idea of when it will learn
about whether it has acquired the desired name. In other words, expiration
date should bear some rational relationship to the time when the name is

  (d) if the scheme agreed upon is such that registrars can compete by
offering differentiated services, then consumers should have some ability to
fairly evaluate the claims made by registrars about their success rates and
how the services are different. (I'd suggest that the current system doesn't
meet this requirement.)

  (e) the current registrant should make his or her decision to renew blind
to the value placed on that domain name by prospective registrants.

  (f) the previous registrant's choice of registrar shouldn't be a factor in
determining what subsequent registrants must do to acquire the name. For
example, the previous registrant's registrar shouldn't enjoy an exclusive
ability to market the name, for any period of time, after the previous
registrant has declined to renew.

I hope that is helpful.

   -- Bret

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

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