[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [discuss] RE: [IFWP] Re: Register.com and the Testbed charges effect
Sorry, I can't equate most ccTLDs and their costs/situations with the
gTLDs com/net/org. Most ccTLDs have narrowly defined, relatively
"local" markets. The effects for .no may be very different.
The simple fact is that it would be rather easy to not charge
registrars for non-pay cancels, and to monitor their perecentages.
Should a registrar have a larger percentage than average, then they
have a problem they need to address, and some performance standards
can be imposed.
This would be the most "competitive" way to setup right now. It would
place the registrars on an even playing field with NSI itself.
On Wed, 09 Jun 1999 12:47:22 +0200, email@example.com wrote:
>> >The big issue, as I see it, is not "prepayment yes" vs. "prepayment no",
>> >but "prepayment yes for some and no for others".
>> >It is self-evident (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this situation is
>> >not a level field for competition.
>> More like this should not be an issue imposed by the registry or
>> ICANN, but a decision each registrar should make. The registry should
>> not penalize or charge registrars for cancellations provided they do
>> not excessively exceed the normal averages for non-pay cancellations.
>> Lets face it, the registry has EXTREMELY little cost involved for
>> inserting and then removing that entry (I'd venture to say none at
>The cost may be small, but it is not zero. I find it perfectly reasonable
>that a registry should charge *some* fee for a domain registration, even
>if that registration is later cancelled. Having zero cost encourages
>rampant domain name speculation. Having a small fee (not the cost of a
>full registration) will make speculation possible, but it won't be free.
>Compare with the stock markets - speculation in the stock markets is not
>> Let the registrars decide what is the best model for them and
>> their target markets. The registrar that sets up a no prepay secure
>> email interface for ISPs to funnel new registrations through will see
>> an influx of millions of dollars of registrations from the ISPs that
>> are tired of dealing with NSI, and are awaiting a registrar that will
>> meet their needs.
>If we're talking about TLDs other than just COM this may also depend on
>the policy of the TLD in question. A TLD may have a policy which says
>for instance that a domain name cannot be *reserved* - that domains are
>only for those who pay for the domains and have real name servers.
>A domain name registration and a later cancellation of the same is for
>all practical purposes equivalent to a temporary reservation of the
>domain name - it will block others from registering the same domain.
>To avoid speculation in such reservations, a fee seems reasonable, even
>if the registration is later cancelled.
>Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, firstname.lastname@example.org
>You are subscribed to dnso.discuss as: [email@example.com]
>To unsubscribe, change your list options, or view archives go to:
>This list system donated by Lyris Technologies (http://www.lyris.com/).
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax:(209) 671-7934
The Law is not your mommy or daddy to go crying
to every time you have something to whimper about.