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

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

Bret and all assembly members or other interested parties,

Bret Fausett wrote:

> >> 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.

  Well it isn't Bret.  And if you read it carefully that should be obvious.
This proposal is also at the registry level, not at the Registrar level.

>
>
> > 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.

  Perhaps.  And if this is so than this would change the structure of this
proposal dramatically depending on what is being considered if anything.
However the proposal as it is now does not indicate this.

>
>
> > 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.

  True if the Whois data is accurate.  Which we all know it isn't in too
many instances.  In addition this should be the ONLY way in which
a guarantee for getting a particular name should occur.  But only AFTER
it has expired.

>
>
> >> 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.

  Again, how?

> 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.

 Glittering generalities!  Bad logic Bret.  None the less again there is
no guarantee in this proposal.  Nor is there any good predictability
either.

>
>
> 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)

  They had advance knowledge...  Hare to prove of course, but that is
the only thing that makes any reasonable sense...

>
>
> 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.

  Yes.  And all one had to do was to be able to look into the registry
database, have a list of the names that one is interested in, and than
look up when they were registered, check their activity, and
in this way use one of the services such as Snapnames to
pick it up if it becomes expired.

>
>
> 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:

  Yes registrars, not registries....

>
>
>    (a) the person first-in-line with a subscription always gets the domain
> name when it deletes; and

  Why is a subscription needed?

>
>
>    (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).

  Not true always...

>
>
> I hope the registrars will keep those in mind as they are evaluating the
> VGRS proposal.

  I hope not, as they are not all valid...

>
>
>          -- 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@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