[registrars] ICANN position on Versign WLS service : Touton recommends it !
(recommandation of Louis Touton to the board)
I speficically note the following points:
- wrt current SnapBack subscriptions:
With respect to registrars currently offering this type of service through
SnapNames' "SnapBack" service, VGRS proposes a special transitional arrangement:
"On the WLS launch date, any domain name that has an existing SnapBack subscription would be
excluded from the WLS system, meaning that no one, including SnapNames or registrars who license
SnapNames' technology, can take out a WLS subscription for that domain names so long as an active
SnapBack subscription is in place. SnapNames, the registrars, and any individuals interested in a particular
domain name would continue to compete for it as they do today."
VeriSign GRS Responses to Domain Name Wait Listing Service Questions (15 Feb. 2001), response 18.
VGRS has not proposed to exclude names presently involved in non-SnapNames services from the WLS.
- WLS is considered as Registry services:
The proposed WLS is a registry service because,
unlike the wait-listing services provided competitively by registrars, it is implemented by bypassing the normal return of
deleted names to the available pool and by instead assigning them to the registrar and customer holding the
reservation. In this way, the proposed WLS would become integrated into the operation of the .com and .net
- Special Role of U.S. Commerce Department in the VeriSign Agreements
ICANN can not amend VGRS agreements without explicit DoC approval.
- I thought that VGRS said WLS has nothing to do with Registry loads ?
But I read :
In the specific case of WLS, however, it is quite possible that some of the technically harmful effects of the
registrar-level services (such as the high registry loads caused by "add storms") may justify instituting a