Re: [ga] WLS

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2002-06-19 08:30:08 -0400, Joe Sims wrote:

>But I get the impression that at least some people believe that  
>there is more to the competitive concern than these point?  If  
>that is right, could someone lay it out for me simply and clearly, 
>so that even I can understand it?  Thanks.

WLS, when implemented without a uniform policy dictating when a  
registrar deletes an expired domain name from the registry's  
database, creates an incentive for registrars to act in a way which  
is detrimental for potential registrants, and may lead to a  
drastically increased registration price for expired domain names.


More precisely, a registrar who is offering WLS as a service may be  
tempted to hoard "interesting" domain names, and to only actually  
release them when a WLS subscription has been placed through him.  A 
WLS subscription placed through a different, competing registrar  
would fail in this situation.

In the situations in which this scheme succeeds, the registrar would 
get his share of the WLS subscription fee, and he would get the 
registration fee proper.

Note that this does not involve any explicit support from the  
registry: All the information needed is available to the acting  
registrar.

To make it even more clear, let me write this down in a step-by-step 
manner:

1. Domain registration name expires, registrant doesn't pay.
2. Registrar doesn't delete domain name (and pays $6).
3. Registrar waits.
4. Potential registrant places WLS subscription and pays $120 to 
   registrar. (For example.)
5. Registrar sends "DEL" to the registry, after an appropriate 
   period of time.
6. WLS kicks in, domain name is registered, registrar has new, 
   paying, and (for the moment) satisfied customer.

If 4. doesn't happen (for instance, a WLS subscription is placed  
through a different registrar), the registrar just doesn't do  
anything.  


Note, BTW, that a similar scheme may also be possible between  
existing registrars and services like SnapNames.  Maybe some here  
feel like investing some money (for purchasing appropriate  
SnapBacks) into an experiment? WLS would just make the incentives  
larger because success would be _guaranteed_.


Effectively, without a uniform deletion policy, there would be no or 
very little actual competition between registrars concerning WLS  
subscriptions for attractive, expired domains which are hoarded by  
registrars: A situation could evolve in which precisely one  
registrar could offer a WLS subscription with an actual chance to  
succeed.  

Such a registrar could then (and would have to, in order to recover  
hoarding costs!) offer WLS subscriptions at an artificially high  
price.


Thus, when WLS is implemented without a uniform deletion policy, 
what's basically established is a high-price mechanism for  
registrars to sell off any domain names they may have hoarded at  
this point of time, or to sell domain names they may hoard in the  
future.

If WLS is implemented with a uniform deletion policy, and if that  
policy is effectively enforced, then WLS _may_ be a good idea from  
the point of view of the possible registrant.


(Actually, a uniform deletion policy is overdue even without WLS.  
Bad enough, almost nobody outside the GA seems to be too interested 
in this.)

-- 
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