[registrars] RE: Equitable Allocation of Shared Registration System Resources

[Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>]

There is a relatively simple solution to this, and that is to separate out
the market for expired domains from the normal market for new domains.

This can be done in a similar manner to that for ".biz" and ".info" to
handle landrush.

e.g
(1) Registry queue up expired domains for a period (e.g 1 month) and
advertise a list of expired domains available
(2) Registry accepts pre-registrations for these expired domains for a
period (e.g 1 week)
(3) Registry executes a random selection from the pre-registrations
(4) Repeat cycle for ever

There definitely needs to be a fairer system for allocating expired domains.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Stubbs [mailto:kstubbs@digitel.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 9:38 PM
To: Registrar@registrar.icann.org; Registrars@dnso.org
Subject: [registrars] Fw: [council] Posting of Second Advisory
Concerning Equitable Allocation of Shared Registration System Resources 


fellow registrars...

i am personally very troubled by the data released by the Verisign Registry
in support or the recent action taken as indicated in the url listed below.
i bothers me to think that that even a "possibility" exists that a limited #
of parties could create a technical "scenerio"   where "registrar-
competitiors" could be denied access to the ability to conduct normal
business.

i would strongly suggest that the registrars form a "working group" led by
our new CTO rick wesson to investigate the circumstances surrounding these
actions described in the letter ... to wit:

" 1.More than 400 million check commands within a six-hour window to
register a few hundred desirable names each morning
 2. Single registrars executing as many as 1500 attempts per second
3. The same registrar sending a check command for the same name in excess of
1000 times per minute over extended periods of time
4. Registrars hoarding connections (grabbing all connections up to their
limit) and, with the exception of the describe command, executing
single-digit numbers of transactions until they are prepared to execute
pre-staged batch jobs that will invade the system at rates noted in excess
of 100,000 per minute
5. Registrars executing in excess of 100,000 check commands for each name
successfully registered, compared to a typical ratio of well under 1,000
check commands for each name successfully registered
6. Registrars who typically use less than 10 connections throughout the day,
then increase that connection count to a triple-digit number
7. Registrars who clearly execute an automated check process (i.e., checks
for the same names at rates in excess of 1000 per minute)
8. Registrars whose typical usage patterns suggest the need for a
single-digit number of connections, and who then increase their connection
count by up to 200 times without a corresponding increase in productive
activity (i.e., a registrar who hoards connections in an apparent attempt to
deny others)

this 'working group" needs to have a balance of both large, medium, & small
registrars ( i would suggest 2 from each category) and should be tasked with
the responsibility of anlyzing the problem, and recommending potential
technical  solutions, ( or other actions as the group  would deem
appropriate) to the balance of the registrar constituancy for proposed
action ( which could be taken at the montevideo meeting).

we need to get started on this NOW...

we registrars,  as a group, need to be much more pro-active in developing
solutions to problems created within our own group rather than sitting back
and waiting for others to impose rules, procedures, etc on us.

i would hope that this proposal would not just get "discussed to death" but
rather implemented ASAP but that is a decision which you as a group need to
support.

your thoughts please ?

best wishes

ken stubbs


> To the Names Council:
>
> ICANN has posted a follow-up to its 16 July advisory concerning
> equitable allocation among registrars of .com/.net/.org Shared
> Registration Services.  The follow-up appears at
> <http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr10aug01.htm>.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Louis Touton
>