Re: [ga] Re: .info LR2 process and failure of ICANN to heed warnings

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

In FCFS realtime landrush  some registrars may suffer from more lagged responses due to 
registar-specific network topologies. That's not fair to non-US registrar which
is far by dozens of network hops from US registry servers, in this milisecond-scale race.

Moreover, if the realtime landrush starts at GMT+0000, many european applicants
will have fallen asleep at that late midnight.  And sudden flooding registration
requests often made the registry server to be shutdowned and that discouraged many
ordinary realtime registrants and many of them really gave up.  Repeated shutdown-and-reboot
process in the registry resulted in irregular success rate distributions among registrars.

Round-robin lottery system with some minimum queue length restriction is
more beneficial to ordinary registrants/regitarars and the registry itself free from those
hassles.

from korea.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William X Walsh" <william@wxsoft.info>
 > 
> > Not all round-robin lottery sucks. Very short queues could have been padded
> > with null entries ("just pass") so that every queue length reach  a certain threshold 
> > determined by the registry for fair name distribution.
> 
> > FCFS-style realtime landrush , without any round-robin connection throttling,
> > was proved to be  poor at fair distributions. We learned that in last October's .info
> > realtime landrush.
> 
> That depends on what you mean by fair distributions.  FCFS is
> certainly more fair than the shenanigans that have been evident in
> every other method these registries have played around with, that have
> been nothing but headaches, and a major source of confusion to
> consumers.
> 
> The landrush you referred to was not a real RCFS.  What you do is you
> make it a violation of the registrars' contracts to accept
> preregistration, and then you just open the registry to real time FCFS
> registrations, NO queues, no lotteries, nothing but real time FCFS as
> the consumer registrations come in.
> 
> None of the proposals I have seen attempted or discussed are any more
> fair than that would be, and have only led to more problems than the
> ones they claimed they were trying to solve.


--
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