Re: [registrars] Re: FW: rejected domain (pailing.net)
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 10:09:27PM +0530, Bhavin Turakhia took time to write:
> > This reminds me of an idea I had about transfers, which I never
> > shared nor develop. Maybe it is silly, but anyway here it is:
> interesting idea ...... my question - which organisation would do this?? and
> for what kind of remuneration (considering most registrars have attractive
> transfer packages making just a couple of cents)??
Two possibilities I see right now:
- in the long term/in theory : chosing/acreditating organizations
should be ICANN role, as it is to choose organizations to handle UDRP
- in the court term/in practice : what sounds reasonable is to try
ourselves to build things. I am not sure if contract-wise it would be
ok, but maybe Registrars together (the ones who whould like to make
transfers not a burden on their customer and improve the current
state) could decide, and then all abide by those rules (that is that
they will each and all remove their own verifications to take only
into account what the ``Transfer Verification Organization'' says).
That is, some Registrars (of course, all would be great, but previous
threads that all/consensus/majority are difficult terms here ;-)) could
form a group, decide that transfers among members of this group will
be handled by a TVO (a neutral party to all of them), and
choose/create/build/whatever such a TVO.
It would be better to have from the beginning and from scratch a
totally independant organization. But this hard to achieve, time and
money consuming. Maybe it can start as a part of a given Registrar
willing to help. Of course, after agreement from all Registrars
participating. Some kind of rules (how the system should work, what
verification is done exactly) would need to be agreed upon all
For example, for transparency, at any time, any transfer among
registrar A and B should list of details (mails sent, mails
received, etc...) avaible through a website (protected area of
course), for both A and B.
The remuneration is of course a very valid/important point. No
bright idea right now. If we take the last point (group of Registrars
deciding to operate like that), each Registrar could participate in
funding. Either same amount for each, or proportionnal to the number
of transfert. Same amount would be simpler.
To run such an organization would not be too complicated/expensive.
After the system is designed (for example to use emails), an effort
has to be done to create it, that is true, but after that most of
things should be automated. Few humans would be needed for abuse
requests and such, but not too many of them I think.
I think that the burden on Registrars would not be too high. Since
the expense will not scale as the number of Registrars/transfers,
(at least certainly not linearly if the system is well built),
more Registrars using the system, means less to pay for each ;-)