DNSO Mailling lists archives


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

Re: [ga] Revised WLS Proposal

Chuck and all assembly members,

  Thank you Chuck for responding to my request here by providing
a .TXT version of this "Revised WLS Proposal".  I hope that
Verisign will consider in putting up an "Open" link in HTML and
.TXT format somewhere readily accessible on their Web site
as well.

  Again Thanks Chuck!  >:)

Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Here's the revised proposal:
> Domain Name
> Wait Listing Service
> Revised by VeriSign Global Registry Services
> January 28, 2002
> Preface to the Revised Version
> This document is a revision to VeriSign Global Registry Services (VGRS)
> Wait Listing Service (WLS) proposal sent to the DNSO Registrars
> Constituency on December 30, 2001.  In this revision VGRS has tried to
> respond as much as possible to feedback received from registrars and
> other interested parties.  To make it easier for registrars and others
> to identify where changes were made, the Word version that accompanies
> the text proposal shows major content changes in italic font.
> With the submission of the initial proposal on December 30, VGRS
> suggested that discussion of the proposal first occur with registrars
> because they would be one of the most significantly impacted parties if
> the WLS was implemented.  The plan at the time was to open up the
> discussion to other gTLD registries and other DNSO constituencies after
> time was allowed for discussion between VGRS and registrars.  Our intent
> was not to limit input by others but rather to make the feedback process
> more manageable.  Some good feedback has already been received from
> other constituencies and individuals interested in this issue and it is
> appreciated.
> With the changes made in this document, VGRS is again requesting
> feedback from the Registrars Constituency, in particular regarding the
> revisions made in this document.  VGRS is also formally asking for
> feedback from any other DNSO constituencies, the DNSO General Assembly,
> and other interested parties, including other registries.  The purpose
> of the requests for feedback is to assist VGRS in making an informed
> decisionabout whether and how to proceed with its proposal for the WLS.
> Procedures for Asking Questions and Providing Feedback
> VGRS recognizes that processes and procedures for fostering discussion
> and obtaining feedback from members of the Internet community are still
> relatively undeveloped in the DNSO and the community at-large.  With
> that in mind, we would like to attempt to add some structure to the WLS
> discussion that we believe will make it easier to answer questions, to
> organize feedback received and to quantify that feedback in a way that
> leads to results that are based on objective analysis rather than
> subjective, unfairly biased or unsubstantiated opinions.  We believe
> that the guidelines below will facilitate these objectives and make the
> process more manageable for all parties.
> As a registry business, we are of course concerned that our business
> needs be met and that the concerns of our customers (registrars) be
> heard and addressed as possible.  At the same time, we believe that the
> needs of end-users (registrants and prospective registrants) are of the
> utmost importance with regard to domain name services.  Consequently, we
> suggest that, in the end, after the feedback is received, that the
> highest priority should be to objectively evaluate the WLS in light of
> the ultimate beneficiary, domain name consumers.  It is our hope that
> the guidelines below will allow that to happen.
> Procedural Guidelines
> 1.      Questions and feedback should be  consolidated by each
> organization wishing to ask questions and/or provide feedback.
> Organizations may include DNSO Constituencies, the DNSO General
> Assembly, or other groups of interested parties that are formally or
> informally organized.  For individuals who wish to contribute who are
> not part of a larger group, it is requested that they provide their
> input through one of the DNSO Constituencies or the DNSO General
> Assembly.
> 2.      In the case of groups of people not associated with DNSO
> organizations, please provide the following information with your
> initial input:
> o       A brief explanation of what your interest is in the proposed WLS
> offering
> o       Objective data regarding the size of your group
> o       A brief characterization of the members of your group (e.g.,
> domain name registrants, intellectual property owners, intellectual
> property associations, etc.)
> o       A statement of the general purpose or mission of your group.
> 3.      Every group submitting questions and/or feedback must provide a
> point of contact and email address that VGRS may use for communicating
> with the group.
> 4.      Deadline for questions:  February 8, 2002
> o       Questions consolidated as requested in item 1 above and
> applicable information requested in item 2 above should be sent to Chuck
> Gomes, VP of Policy and Compliance for VGRS at cgomes@verisign.com..
> 5.      Deadline for VGRS responses to questions:  February 15, 2002 .
> 6.      Deadline for final feedback:  March 1, 2002
> o       Final feedback consolidated as requested in item 1 above and
> applicable information as requested in item 2 above should be sent to
> Chuck Gomes, VP of Policy and Compliance for VGRS at
> cgomes@verisign.com.
> o       To assist VGRS in evaluating feedback, please provide the
> following objective data:
> §       What is the nature of the members of your group (e.g.,
> individuals, registrars, registries, trade organizations, etc.)?
> §       What is the total size of your membership?[chuck—INEGroup has
> 114k members!]
> §       How many members of your group participated in the WLS feedback
> process leading up to the final feedback provided?
> §       How many members who contributed to the WLS feedback you
> provided to VGRS are involved or planning to be involved in the process
> of directly or indirectly using the VGRS batch delete system for
> registering just-deleted names?
> §       What efforts did your group make to reach out to members of your
> group who did not participate in the WLS discussion process?
> o       In preparing feedback    to the revised proposal, it is
> important to remember that the proposal is not submitted as a permanent
> offering but rather a 12-month trial.  Although based on the information
> it has seen to date VGRS believes that there is more than enough
> evidence to support consumer demand for such a service and that the best
> way to offer such a service from a consumer point of view is to offer it
> at the registry level, we also recognize that there is still
> considerable debate about some issues.  A 12-month trial period will
> allow time to get empirical answers to questions that have been raised.
> o       Constructive suggestions for improving the proposed WLS offering
> are encouraged and welcomed.  Statements of opposition are also welcome
> but should be accompanied with briefly stated reasons.
> 7.      Target for VGRS decision regarding the WLS proposal:  March 8,
> 2001
> o       VGRS will attempt to evaluate the feedback received not later
> than March 8, 2002 and, if it is decided to consider proceeding with the
> offering, will submit a final pricing proposal to ICANN for its approval
> per the requirements of Appendix G of the ICANN-VeriSign registry
> agreements
> Complementary Paper
> Please note that a complementary paper was prepared by VGRS titled
> ‘Justification for a Registry-based Wait Listing Service.’  The purpose
> of the paper is four-fold:
> 1.      To provide a brief overview of the VGRS proposed WLS for .com
> and .net second-level domain names.
> 2.      To provide members of the Internet community a high level
> overview of the current situation with regard to registering previously
> registered .com, .net and .org second-level domain names
> 3.      To highlight what VGRS sees as the advantages of the WLS
> 4.      To provide responses to some of the criticism that has been
> presented to date in opposition to a Registry-based Wait Listing
> Service.
> Summary of Major Revisions
> Here is a summary of the major changes made with this revision:
> §       An introductory explanation was added at the beginning of the
> proposal.
> §       The maximum number of times a subscriber would be allowed to
> transfer a subscription to a different name was changed from three to
> five (see Section 2.a.vii).
> §       The proposed 15-day Registry Hold period has been omitted from
> this document.  Although the proposal has merit in addressing several
> problems that have arisen, including inadvertently deleted names, it is
> a distinct idea and VGRS believes that it is best considered separately.
> §       Specific key milestone dates were changed to TBD in Section 3.
> §       Possible terms were suggested for the Signed Service Agreement
> in Section 4.a based on feedback received from the DNSO Intellectual
> Property Constituency.
> §       The original billing and fee structure was replaced with a new
> one in Section 5.
> §       A companion paper titled ‘Justification for a Registry-based
> Wait Listing Service’ was issued at the same time as this revised
> proposal.
> 1.      Introduction
> In response to a formal request by Rick Wesson on behalf of the
> Registrar Constituency, VeriSign, Inc. is providing this paper to
> describe its proposed Domain Name Wait Listing Service (WLS).
> Specifically, the proposed WLS is intended to provide both (1) a new,
> streamlined business opportunity for the entire registrar community, and
> (2) some measure of relief in dealing with the “deleted domains” issue.
> VeriSign believes that introduction of WLS will benefit all interested
> constituencies (e.g., registries, registrars, resellers, intellectual
> property owners and domain name registrants).  To that end, we address
> the following topics in this paper:
> ·       High-level mechanics of how the WLS will be delivered and
> distributed;
> ·       WLS implementation milestones and go-live requirements for
> registrars;
> ·       Billing model;
> ·       Effects on interested parties; and,
> ·       Market potential and rationale.
> Pursuant to a license from SnapNames of its Parallel RegistryTM
> technology, VeriSign, Inc., through its VeriSign Global Registry
> Services (“VGRS”) division, is prepared to offer the WLS to VGRS’s
> ICANN-accredited registrar channel.    VGRS anticipates that it would
> offer WLS for a one-year test, beginning at a date to be determined.
> Results would be compiled during the last two months of the test and
> provided to ICANN.
> Accordingly, VeriSign solicits constructive feedback from all members of
> the Registrar Constituency as well as other DNSO constituencies, the
> DNSO General Assembly and other interested parties in the Internet
> community.  We have reserved time with our engineering and operations
> staff during the February and March timeframe to move this project
> forward.  Due to this time schedule, we request that feedback regarding
> the revised proposal be received by March 1, 2002, so that we will have
> time to compile, evaluate, and respond to comments.  Questions and
> comments should be consolidated as requested at the beginning of this
> document and directed to Chuck Gomes (cgomes@verisign.com).
> 2.      Service Overview and Mechanics
> WLS is a service whereby potential registrants (hereinafter referred to
> as “subscriber(s)”), through their selected, participating registrar,
> may purchase a subscription tied to a domain name currently registered.
> Only ICANN-accredited registrars would be able to offer the subscription
> service for .com and .net domain name registrations.  WLS subscriptions
> for the .org TLD would not be available during the one-year test period.
> Registrars would have the opportunity to decide whether or not to allow
> their resellers to offer the service.  Registrars would perform all
> subscription transactions directly with VGRS, using an interface
> separate from the Shared Registration System (SRS).  The VeriSign
> Registry Registrar Protocol (RRP) would not be used in the
> implementation of WLS.  All current processes would remain unchanged
> with one exception.  A domain name registration that is subscribed to on
> WLS will be registered to the subscriber when the current domain name
> registration is deleted through normal operational procedures.
> Initially, a domain name registration could only have one (1)
> subscription pending at a time.  If demand exists, a deeper subscription
> queue could be considered for a future phase of WLS.  The processes for
> placing and fulfilling subscription(s) would be as follows:
> a.      Process for subscribing to WLS:
> ·       Only in the event that a domain name is already registered
> within the SRS, the registrar checks the WLS to see if a subscription
> already exists for that domain name.
> 1.      Note:  Only two scenarios will prevent a registrar in good
> standing from being able to submit a subscription.  The first is if a
> subscription already exists for a specific domain name.  The second is
> if the selected domain name registration does not already exist within
> the SRS database.
> ·       If the domain name is not already subscribed to in WLS, then the
> registrar submits a subscription for that name to WLS.
> ·       NOTE:  The subscription submitted to WLS by the registrar is the
> same data (minus nameserver information) that registrars currently
> submit to "ADD" new .com and .net domain names.  WLS collects no
> subscriber data and, as today, VGRS will have no direct contact with a
> subscriber.  The subscriber stays the registrar’s customer.  The
> subscription registrar will add nameserver data after the selected
> domain name is actually registered in the registry for the registrar on
> behalf of the subscriber.
> ·       WLS notifies the SRS that the domain name is on the subscription
> list.  The SRS identifies the name in the SRS database as being a
> subscribed name.
> ·       WLS notifies the registrar of the successful subscription.
> ·       The subscription registrar notifies the subscriber of the
> successful subscription.
> ·       NOTE:  The subscription is tied to a single domain name at any
> point in time.  However, over the life of the one-year subscription
> period, the subscriber can change the domain name tied to the
> subscription up to a maximum of five times.
> ·       After the last day of each calendar month, VGRS will send each
> registrar an invoice for all subscriptions successfully submitted during
> the previous month.  For further information on the billing model and
> specific pricing, see Section 5 of this paper.
> b.      Process for subscription fulfillment:
> ·       A domain name is deleted through the normal course of operation
> (e.g., registrar submits a delete request).
> ·       NOTE:  Any deletion grace period, as applicable, will still
> apply.
> ·       The SRS processes the deletion and checks to see if the deleted
> name is on WLS.
> ·       If the name is on WLS, the name is automatically "added" to the
> SRS database using the registration data supplied by the subscription
> registrar at the time the subscription was made.
> ·       At this time, the registrar’s VGRS account is debited $6 for the
> domain name registration fee.  All other regular business rules
> affecting registration of domain names will apply at this time.
> ·       VGRS then notifies the subscription registrar of the
> subscription fulfillment.
> ·       The subscription registrar modifies the registration record to
> include nameserver data and updates its WHOIS database in accordance
> with the registrar’s responsibilities under the current
> Registry-Registrar Agreement and ICANN Accreditation Agreement.
> ·       The subscription registrar notifies the subscriber of the
> successful registration.  The “subscriber” is now a registrant.
> ·       The subscription will be cleared from WLS and a new subscription
> can be placed for the domain name by any registrar.
> c.      Subscription Renewals:  At the time a subscriber submits an
> application for a subscription, it can choose whether or not to have the
> subscription auto-renew at the end of its term.  If the subscriber does
> not choose auto-renewal at the initial subscription period, then it may
> still choose that feature at any time during its term.  If it never
> chooses auto-renewal, the subscription will automatically terminate (be
> deleted) when the one-year term expires.  All renewal terms are for one
> year.
> d.      Subscription Transfers:  In an effort to keep the one-year test
> as simple as possible, VGRS does not plan to allow subscribers to
> transfer subscriptions from one registrar to another registrar, as can
> be done with domain name registrations today.
> e.      Subscription Cancellations:  A subscriber may cancel a
> subscription at any time by submitting, through its registrar of record,
> a “delete” request through the WLS.  Please note that subscription fees
> are non-refundable.
> f.      Subscription Disputes:  The Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy
> (“UDRP”) would not apply to subscriptions within the WLS, as the domain
> names associated with subscriptions would not actually be registered.
> As the UDRP only applies to registered domain names, a party wishing to
> dispute a domain name associated with a subscription would wait until
> after the domain name is actually registered to employ the provisions of
> the UDRP.
> g.      Conclusion of 12-Month Trial:  VGRS assumes the following:
> ·       Subscriptions continuing beyond the end of the trial period
> would continue to be serviced by VGRS and registrars.
> ·       Registrars, ICANN and VGRS will mutually develop evaluation
> criteria for the 12-month trial.
> 3.      Key Milestones (for ramping and going live)
> As stated earlier, VeriSign will remain poised to move the WLS project
> forward to implementation.

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208

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 >>>