Re: [ga] Planning for 2007 -- ICANN negotiations over .com wholesale pricing

["William Stacey [MVP]" <staceyw@mvps.org>]

Hello, new to the group so please be kind :-)  I agree with this George.  From an outsiders and users perspective, there needs to be
some reform IMO.  I'm not so sure about Tucows, but I think an IT services company may be better for many reasons.  I am also not so
sure that the registry should be allowed to also be a registrar as there would seem to be some conflict of interest.  I used to work
for EDS, so I think someone like that would be a great place to host the registry (experience with massive systems, and running and
tracking deliverables.  Also, they may not be looking so much at the money but the opportunity to have presence in the area)   Here
are some thoughts on registry deliverables for the customer (i.e. ultimately the registrant) :

- Near real time domain name transfers - obviously with email approval (or email redirected to a web page) of the current admin.  I
have been working on a "simple" transfer for over 10 days now (this is Internet time?)  There is 2 registrants and 2 registrars
involved and no transaction system or real tracking measurements.  This, IMO, could be made much better by moving this up to the
registry.  Registry will host the site that originates transfers and performance data, etc.  Original point of entry is the
registry.  Registry sends transfer request to the current registrant for approval.  The registrant can send back email approval or
follow a link to approve transfer with a button.  Done.  Registry can make the change in real time, and let propagation work.  New
Registrant can have piece of mind that it is done and move on to other things.  Same process will work whether your transferring
between registrars (or not), or between registrants (or not).  Registry will also handle cases where there is legal cause for
transfer but current registrant is not conforming or dead, etc.

- Registry should also have public web display of all performance data and criteria.

- Registry should also have public exported APIs for automation (i.e. .NET, java, what ever) with registrars and end users.

- Registry will also publicly track and post each registrar's statistics; such as domain names registered and monthly statistics,
etc.  Maybe even a central place to track "stars" on each registry.

- Registry will also host a community of ngs, web pages, informational material, etc.  And implement a help desk tracking system to
track emails from registrar's or registrants so things don't get "lost" in the cracks.  Of course, this management data will be
posted as well.

- Best place for accurate whois information.  Which should also be exported via RPC or .NET, etc.  Can also format this data better
for display on forms and search methods,etc.  More of a sql backend with whois being just one type of client or data consumer.

Can think of more, but that is the general idea.  Having people like IBM and EDS compete on it will raise the quality of services
and service level and drive down the cost.  I am not convinced that smaller companies could bring the economies of scale to the
table needed pull this off (maybe.)  People like IBM and EDS may even operate it at a loss for the "talking points" factor or
industry recognition - which ultimately can turn into profit for them.

Just some thoughts I had as I was reading your mail George.  Thank you :-)

--William Stacey


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Kirikos" <gkirikos@yahoo.com>
To: <ga@dnso.org>
Cc: <karl@CaveBear.com>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 9:38 AM
Subject: [ga] Planning for 2007 -- ICANN negotiations over .com wholesale pricing


Hello,

Verisign has a stranglehold over the .com registry until 2007. However,
at some point, probably sooner than we expect, negotiations will take
place to renew that contract. Given how we've seen how ICANN has
bungled previous negotiations, I think it's important that consensus
principles be put in place by the community well in advance (i.e. we
should start now, and pass any necessary resolutions/votes), so that
the Board has no doubt what is acceptable and what is not in future
negotiations, to force it to comply with certain standards.

I believe Tucows/OpenSRS has already stated that they'd be happy to
take over the registry at a wholesale price of $2/name-year, which is
much lower than the current $6/name-year realized by Verisign. Other
parties, if offered the opportunity, might be able to do similar or
better pricing. Lower wholesale pricing of registrations would provide
huge consumer benefits, as the savings by registrars are passed on to
consumers. Registrars themselves would probably also benefit, due to
increased volumes from the new lower prices they can offer.

Thus, maximization of competition for the contract over operation of
the .com registry, in order to provide consumer benefits, should be one
of the cornerstone principles, in my view. Is there a consensus for
this?

How can this be accomplished? I think one obvious way is to prepare, at
an early stage (years in advance), performance and technical standards
for the .com registry (these might already be in place, i.e. for
Verisign. Thus, companies who are interested in operating the .com
registry can begin the process now of achieving or beating those
standards.

I think another important thing to do would be to widely promote those
standards, and invite companies that are interested in competing with
Verisign for the .com registry to begin a dialogue with ICANN, via a
special public discussion list, or other public means (so as not to
advantage any one party, and to enhance transparency) early. I'm sure
many of us can identify parties who'd be interested in operation of the
registry (e.g. possibly other registry operators, Oracle, IBM, Dun &
Bradstreet, Sun, Yahoo, Amazon.com, AOL, EDS, etc.) Perhaps even
consortiums of companies would emerge to create best-of-breed
solutions, if they had early enough notice of the opportunity.

This is a starting point....hopefully some creative brainstorming will
lead us to a document that can be voted upon at some point, to give the
Board proper direction. Otherwise, we're apt to see the Board presented
with a 'done deal' one day, negotiated behind closed-doors, which might
not be in the community's best interests.

Putting things to a 'vote' in the Names Council/GNSO eventually, I
think we might even get unanimity over these principles (the only
constituency that might be against competition in the .com registry is
the gTLD constituency, but I don't think Verisign has a majority of the
votes there; even then, they'd likely have to abstain).

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.Kirikos.com/
--
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


--
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