ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[registrars]


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

Re: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete


Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> Mike/Tim,
> 
> Based on a variety of requests from registrars, we have been carefully
> exploring this issue for the past couple months.  Mike - your assessment is
> incorrect.  We would actually like to go to an explicit renew/auto delete
> approach.  

I'm curious what the benefit for Verisign would
be for you to do this...

> But I personally have been arguing against it because I thought
> that this would create a bad situation for registrars.

As mentioned, I agree with this.

> A week ago I
> actually discussed this was Elliot and he was very supportive.  What would
> help us is to get a broader perspective of all registrars views on this as
> soon as possible.  Anything you can do to make that happen would be greatly
> appreciated.
> 
> Specifically, what would be helpful is to know whether registrars would
> support a requirement that registrars MUST explicitly renew a name in the
> renew grace period.

Other than what Elliot has already mentioned, which is not
an issue for us, I don't see any advantage to doing this and
we would be against it.

>  If a name was not explicitly renewed, it would
> automatically go into the delete cycle (including the RGP period in the
> future).
> 
> A related idea that Elliot suggested is this: for some to-be-determined
> period at the end of the renew grace period (e.g., last 15 days), all names
> not explicitly renewed must be put on Registrar Hold. The purpose would be
> to use that as a last warning to registrants that their name was in
> jeopardy.

Last warning?

Assumes that the name is "in use" by the registrant.

And even if the name was in use, in the following
case, for example, the fact that a name was on registrar
hold (or deleted for that matter) would not necessarily come
to the attention of the registrant.

Example:

Customer owns "XYZ.com" and gets mail at "mail@xyz.com"
and has a website www.xyz.com

Customer also owns "xyz2.com" and gets mail at "mail@xyz2.com"

Xyz2.com is put on registrar hold.  

Customer doesn't notice hold status unless they 
explicitly monitor that domain since: emails still
arrive to xyz.com and www.xyz.com still gets traffic.

(And maybe even in the case of xyz.com, that mail gets
forwarded to an aol account and they don't even
monitor the website so they might not even notice
if their only domain is put on hold.)

In the case of customers who own multiple domains all 
pointing to the same location or even pointing to multiple
locations a single name that is not functioning would not
necessarily be picked up.


Larry Erlich

http://www.DomainRegistry.com 


> 
> Chuck
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:52 AM
> To: tim@godaddy.com; registrars@dnso.org
> Cc: Chuck Gomes
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
> 
> Thanks Tim,
> 
> This helped a lot in clearing up my perceived misunderstanding. However, if
> you read my most recent post, Pandora's Box, I believe VeriSign is likely to
> just say no. Based upon the huge sums of money that VeriSign Registry is
> sitting on, I just do not see them being magnanimous. If we were to try to
> mandate an ICANN policy, I would bet the house VeriSign Registry is likely
> to say that they relied upon this float in arriving at their $6 dollar
> price. Thus if payment terms were changed by ICANN policy, VeriSign Registry
> could request a fee increase.
> 
> As I stated hopefully I am wrong, and Chuck Gomes will send me an email
> telling me VeriSign Registry will agree to waive the fees during the 45 day
> grace period (I copied him on this email). However, I would not hold my
> breath believing that VeriSign Registry is just going to throw a huge
> financial bone to us registrars.
> 
> Mike
> 


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------


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