[registrars] Problem with Percentages and other alledged facts

["Michael D. Palage" <michael@palage.com>]

I agree that additional statistic information from registrars employing an
autoNAC procedure would be interesting considering that the only real hard
number that has been circulated is 23.6%, referenced in NSI's yet to be made
public survey.

However, I would raise some concerns about reliability in ANY numbers that
are circulated without being able to verify their objectivity. Consider the
following. A registrant investigates renewing a domain name through his
current registrar, Losing Registrar, and sees that the price is $35 dollars.
Registrant finds a competing registrar, Gaining Registrar, offering domain
name renewals at $20 a year. Registrant seeks to transfer the domain name
from Losing Registrar to Gaining Registrar. Losing registrar sends email
confirmation to registrant with an offer for domain name renewal at $15
dollars a year. Registrant viewing domain names as a commodity sends a NAC
request in accordance with the promotional material, and renews with Losing
Registrar.

In the following example did Gaining Registrar attempt to slam the
registrant. I think the answer in this fact pattern is clearly no. However,
would Losing Registrar attempt to use proof of a high NAC response to
evidence slamming. This is a complex issue and we must make sure that the
methodology involving the numbers we look at are as objective as possible.

My concern is the following. To date I still know of NO reported slamming
incidents reported to ICANN. As mentioned by several registrars in
Stockholm, are we creating a problem that does not exist to justify certain
procedural safeguards in the name of consumer safety?

One set of numbers that I would like to see is how many bounced email
messages are losing registrars getting in response to their email. Moreover,
what are these registrars doing to comply with the ICANN requirement that
all Whois data be accurate and up to date.

This actually raises an interesting question. Most registrars have been
reluctant to accept or impose new duties. The reason being that once you
accept a duty, even if you were not required to do so, if you negligently
fail to perform that duty you potential expose yourself to legal (tort)
liability. Consider the following hypothetical. Registrar gets a bounced
email from a transfer request to a non-functioning email address. Registrar
fails to correct this problem which they have been now put on notice of and
which is in violation of ICANN requirement to keep contact data accurate and
current. Something happens that results in the lose of the domain name to a
third party (i.e. similar to the sex.com domain name).  Is the registrar now
subject to liability for failure to protect the best interest of the
registrant/consumer when it was first put on notice of the faulty Whois
information.

I think that it is very important for registrars to think of the
repercussions of their actions when undertaking new duties, particularly
when they state that they are doing so to protect the best interest of the
consumer.

Mike


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Rob Hall
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 9:41 AM
> To: CORE Secretariat (W); registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [registrars] Would NSI/Verisign indicate auto-nack
> percentage?
>
>
> Actually, I would like to take it one further.
>
> Can the Registrars that are auto-nacking (I think there are currently 4)
> provide stats on how many of their users are
> actually saying 'NO' as opposed to not replying.
>
> A summary or snapshot of stats for those saying yes, no and the
> non-replies
> would be interesting.
>
> Rob.
>
> At 01:16 PM 6/15/2001 +0200, CORE Secretariat (W) wrote:
> >Dear all,
> >
> >Can NSI/Verising indicate what percentage of transfer requests
> >were auto-nacked over the last week?
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Werner
> >--
> >CORE Internet Council of Registrars   http://corenic.org
> >WTC II, 29 route de Pre-Bois, CH-1215 Geneva, Switzerland
> >Tel +4122 929-5744 Fax +4122 929-5745 secretariat@corenic.org
>
>
>
> --
> Rob Hall                                voice  (613) 768-5100
> President                                  fax  (613) 820-0777
> Momentous.ca Corp.
> rob@momentous.ca                      www.momentous.ca
>
>
>
> iti,s
>