Re: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!

["Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl@gih.com>]

>From: "Marc Schneiders" <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>
>To: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl@gih.com>
>Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 3:29 PM


> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, at 12:59 [=GMT+0100], Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
wrote:
>
> > The only fair way about expired domain names is to erase them from
> > the database altogether, and not provide anybody with details about
> > their expiry.
>
> Well, except the registrant perhaps? In any case, the ICANN rules that
> bind the registrars force them to put the expiration date in whois.

Correct, but until the holder of that domain renews it, nobody knows
if it will indeed expire, or if it will be renewed. You would have to
keep a good tab on domain expiry times, to check again a day after
expiry if it still exists or has been erased.

>
> > If somebody then wants to keep on mining the database,
> > and trying to find out if "interesting" domain names (ie. ones that
> > could be re-sold at a lucrative price - in other words, domain
> > hoarding and speculation) have expired and been deleted, it's up to
> > them, but erasing the names will make it pretty hard for them to find
out.
>
> Really? Just a matter of checking via cron jobs and seeing patterns.

Registry operators do not allow for automatic mining of their
database in their AUP. As for themselves running cron jobs, well,
they know when each domain expires anyway, but they should not
be allowed to be involved in this with a view of mothballing the domain.

[...]

> > I personally find this to be disgusting. Domain name speculation is
> > on-par with cowboy practices. Those endulging in it should be ashamed
> > of themselves, because it does nothing for the Internet; the only
> > incentive here, is fast cash, or a par with ticket touts. Trouble is,
> > ticket touts are illegal, and the Internet is not mature enough to shame
> > domain touting, because most actors out there today, are knee-deep
> > in it.
>
> This is a silly analysis. If it is an analysis. Domain names are not any
> different from other scarce goods. The solution is relieving the scarcity.
> Impossible with tickets, not with domain names. Solve the problem at the
> root.

I know, I know, the everlasting argument that if a million top level domains
were allowed, there would be no scarce resource in domains themselves,
thus making the domains value-less. This is where I disagree. With any
number
of top level domains allowed, we would see a scarcity of top level domains
in a matter of months, any kind of stability as to the DNS would be lost
because top level domains would constantly appear and disappear with
companies going bust etc. IMHO, it would be complete anarchy. No
reliable WHOIS pages, no accountability.

>
> > One last point: domain names are not owned by registries/registrars.
> > They are merely the maintainers of the database. Too many of them
> > seem to think otherwise.
>
> Who does own them?
>
>

This is another can of worms. IMHO, the domain name holder owns the domain.
Many will disagree. Many will agree. The yearly fee paid to the registry is,
IMHO,
the fee paid for the priviledge of having the domain name held within the
root database. Now I may be completely wrong on that one, but this is how
it was meant to be at the beginning. The initial database was held at
nic.ddn.mil.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) was then put in charge of it, and
contracted the then InterNIC to run the database for a specified period.
Things started going wrong when SAIC took charge, the service was re-branded
Network Solutions, the contract expired, Network Solutions argued that the
database was their property, and NSF, having made a mess of the initial
contract, did not have the balls to affirm its authority. Yes, this was in
the
early 90s, and from this point onwards, things went from bad to worse. The
acquiring of InterNIC by Verisign made things even more complex.

The apple did not rot overnight. The mess we are seeing today is the direct
result of years and years of mistakes, by various administrations, and
various
individuals. Many then actors were academics and engineers that never
thought
they'd have to face the harsh reality of the commercial world. In this
world,
everybody (and I mean everybody) who has had a hand in making decisions
tried to get away with as much as they could get away with. The right
solution
was seldom achieved. It was those who could flex their arm stronger than the
others that had their way. Today, everybody is flexing their arm, and
someone's
got to break. Undeniably, it will be very messy.

Having said that, a number of individuals out there have made great
contributions
to the Internet, some with little or no recognition. They can now be classed
in
two groups: those who are in the public light, sustaining a daily quota of
attacks
and abuse, and those who were so disgusted by the arm-flexing and vicious
personal attacks that they retired, or are working behind the scenes on some
more meaningful projects. Yes, the debate has lost a lot of people over the
years...

But I am digressing and rambling, so I'll hand the mike over to someone
else.

Cheers,

--
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. |--> Global Information Highway Limited
E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | Tel:+44 (0)7956 84 1113 | Fax:+44 (0)20 7937 7666
Web: http://www.gih.com/ & http://www.nsrc.org/codes/country-codes.html

--
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