<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[ga] WLS referred to the DNSO; WLS & competition
According to
<http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-22apr02.htm>, the WLS
proposal has been referred to the DNSO for comment.
I'd suggest that the GA tries to dig out those arguments which are
actually reliable, and compiles an "official" position, this time.
Here's one possible argument which hasn't come up, yet, I think.
Maybe my thinking is flawed - if so, please point it out.
Consider any registrar who has hoarded expired domain names. Such a
registrar could wait for WLS subscriptions being made through it.
Once a WLS subscription for a hoarded domain name is there, the
domain could be relased - and immediately re-registered through the
same registrar, due to the WLS subscription. If a WLS subscription
is made through a different registrar, nothing happens.
Rumor of this could be expected to quickly spread in the community:
If you want to back-order a domain name which has expired, but is
not available, go to the old registrar for your WLS subscription.
Ultimately, this approach to selling off hoarded domain names (which
would be economically quite attractive at least to Verisign, and -
at sufficiently high WLS prices - possibly also for other
registrars) could lead to a _significant_ increase in the cost for
registering an expired domain. It would also skew competition
between registrars as far as registrations of these domains are
concerned - effectively, potential registrants would be forced to go
to the "old" registrar.
The conclusion from this scenario is to hold up WLS until the
hoarding problem has been solved.
--
Thomas Roessler http://log.does-not-exist.org/
--
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|