Re: [ga] VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Chuck and all assembly members,

  Coming from a Versign employee, this view is not at all
surprising.  >;)

Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Bret's understanding of "VeriSign's FUD" seems pretty accurate to me.
>
> Chuck
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bret Fausett [mailto:baf@fausett.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 2:22 AM
> > To: ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [ga] VeriSign Proposal a Done Deal??
> >
> >
> > >> Registrants, for one. The principal improvement of the
> > Waiting List Service
> > >> proposed last week is that if you buy a subscription, then
> > you're certain to
> > >> get your desired domain name if and when it lapses.
> > >
> > > C'mon, Bret, that's crap and you know it.  What is the basis, FCFS?
> >
> > Yes. My understanding of the proposal, is that it's first-come,
> > first-served, just as in registering a new domain name.
> >
> > > So you join a queue of 20 people all waiting for the domain name?
> >
> > If I read the proposal correctly, it's not certain whether
> > there will be
> > more than one person allowed to take a subscription. I
> > believe that's still
> > under discussion.
> >
> > > For example, if you know who is in the queue above you,
> > what's to stop you
> > > from contacting them and buying out their interest?
> >
> > Nothing that I can see. So what? Nothing to stop you from
> > contacting any
> > domain name owner and buying out their registration contract either.
> >
> > >> Under a registrar-based model, you'd have to purchase a
> > subscription with
> > >> all of the various registrars who offer a competing
> > service in order to get
> > >> close to the same guarantee.  It would cost more, in both money and
> > >> aggravation, and still not guarantee that you would get the name.
> > >
> > > I'm amazed that you fall for VeriSign's FUD.  There are no
> > guarantees.
> >
> > No, if the system works the way it's intended, you should be
> > guaranteed the
> > name. Of course, on the registrars list, you can already see companies
> > exploring the idea of using the window of time after the
> > customer has lost
> > rights in the names for non-renewal but before the name
> > actual deletes to
> > offer their own service. If that's permitted, it would
> > significantly devalue
> > the WLS.
> >
> > Guarantees and predictability are generally good for registrants.
> >
> > If you've tried to pick up a deleting name over the last
> > year, you've faced
> > two problems:
> >
> >    1. knowing when it was going to drop
> >       (expiration date seems to have virtually nothing to do with
> >       when a name is actually deleted); and
> >
> >    2. knowing how to get it first, when it dropped
> >       (before Snapnames and other commercial services, this was
> >       a dark art that bordered on the occult)
> >
> > Even with Snapnames or some of the other registrar offerings, you were
> > playing the odds. $49.00 got you a Snapback. Dotster's
> > Namewinner service
> > was an auction, which cost another $25.00 minimum to play.
> > eNom and some
> > other registrars had their own services. All of those services were
> > competing against each other for the name you wanted. As a
> > consequence, if
> > you REALLY wanted a name, you had to play all the games to
> > maximize your
> > chances. Add up all the fees and you're well over whatever it
> > is that VGRS
> > and the registrars will charge for this WLS.
> >
> > So from the perspective of someone who has paid for these
> > services in the
> > past, I don't particularly care what system the registrars
> > adopt, but I do
> > think these two features are important:
> >
> >    (a) the person first-in-line with a subscription always
> > gets the domain
> > name when it deletes; and
> >
> >    (b) change of ownership always happens at a defined time after the
> > previous owner's registration has lapsed (i.e. no more random periods
> > between expiration and deletion).
> >
> > I hope the registrars will keep those in mind as they are
> > evaluating the
> > VGRS proposal.
> >
> >          -- Bret
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html