Re: [registrars] 18 (make that 9 - maybe) Registrars Endorse WLSImplementation

["mdierstein" <mdierstein@namebay.com>]

Dear Jim,

Namebay is a totally "independant" company which is looking to serve its
customers interests the best as it can and which is trying to be profitable
(ie to stay in operation). Usually its members of the Board, and especially
its Chairman, are perfectly and thoroughly aware of the documents  they
signed.
I would like you to know that we particularly dislike the tone of this
thread that we find at least discourteous.

Mathieu Dierstein
Member of the Board
Namebay

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Archer" <jarcher@registrationtek.com>
To: <jim.foley@neteka.com>; <Registrars@dnso.org>
Cc: <wessorh@ar.com>; <wls@verisign.com>; <halloran@icann.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: [registrars] 18 (make that 9 - maybe) Registrars Endorse
WLSImplementation


> Given that two of the companies listed as signers to this letter have
> retracted their signatures, I wonder if other "signers" of this letter are
> aware that they signed it, or are aware of its contents if they did sign
> it?  Prehaps some investigation should be made to be sure this is not a
> hoax, or that those companies listed are aware they have been listed.  I
> could understand one company being accidently listed, or listed through a
> mis-communication, but two?  This seems a stretch.
>
> Also, I wonder how many of these companies have common ownership?  For
> example, I have been told, but have not checked in each case, that NSI
> ownes:
>
> NameEngine, New York, NY, USA Antony Van Couvering
> NameSecure, Moravia, CA, USA Gary Khachadoorian
> VeriSign Registrar, Herndon, VA, USA Bruce Beckwith
> SRSPlus, Los Angeles, California, USA Anthony Bishop
> Registrars.com, Los Angeles, California USA David Barbosa
>
> Further, I have been told that SnapNames partners are:
>
> DomainSite.com, Boston, MA, USA Rick Zaniboni
> NameScout, Ontario, Canada Rob Hall
>
>
> Given that two of the "signers" have retracted their support of this
> letter, and given further that many of these companies have common
> ownership, I believe this letter should be taken with a grain of salt, to
> say the least.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> --On Thursday, March 07, 2002 6:03 PM -0500 jim.foley@neteka.com wrote:
>
> > March 7, 2002
> >
> > Rick Wesson (wessorh@ar.com)
> > Registrars Constituency
> >
> > Chuck Gomes (wls@verisign.com)
> > VeriSign
> >
> > Dear Messrs. Wesson and Gomes:
> >
> > We, the undersigned ICANN-accredited registrars, none of whom utilize
our
> > connections to VeriSign Global Registry Service to give preferential
> > access to any customers over any other customers, appreciate this
> > opportunity to provide our feedback on VGRS' domain name Wait List
> > Service (WLS), which has recently been released for final comment in a
> > modified form.  Per VeriSign's invitation to submit our comments, we
are,
> > as instructed, submitting our comments through "one of the DNSO
> > constituencies" -- in this case, the Registrars Constituency, in the
> > person of Rick Wesson.  Our point of contact is Jim Foley of Neteka, who
> > may be reached at jim.foley@neteka.com <mailto:jim.foley@neteka.com.
> >
> > Our industry, now through its first stage of growth, is facing a number
of
> > issues challenging its capability to further grow and mature while
meeting
> > the needs of all users.  This is particularly true with respect to the
> > issue of deleting domain names-this "secondary" market of .com and .net
> > names, in reality, will shortly become the primary market, as the
> > inventory of reasonably usable new names further depletes and customer's
> > choices will be principally from the previously registered names now
> > deleting back into availability.
> >
> > At present, however, the aggressive competition for deleting names-by
> > registrars, professional speculators, and third-party service
providers-is
> > effectively freezing out the mainstream customer, who without
> > sophisticated equipment or even an understanding of how to find and
> > secure a deleting name, has no practical access to the new primary
domain
> > name marketplace. Accordingly, a change is necessary to restore a level
> > playing field for all users, and to bring fair, equitable and practical
> > access to all potential registrants.  In this context, we offer our
> > conditional support for the modified WLS proposal (as published on
> > January 29, 2002), on a
> > proof-of-concept basis intended to provide all concerned more
information
> > on its viability as a long-term solution.
> >
> > Thank you for your consideration.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > BulkRegister.com, Baltimore, MD, USA Tom D'Alleva
> > ChinaDNS, Beijing, China Edward Lee
> > DirectNic, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA Michael Brunson
> > DomainMonger.com, Washington State, USA Austin Linford
> > DomainSite.com, Boston, MA, USA Rick Zaniboni
> > Galcomm.com, Rishon Lezion, Israel Moshe Fogel
> > Go Daddy, Scotttsdale, AZ, USA Bob Parsons
> > Namebay, Monaco Patricia Husson
> > NameEngine, New York, NY, USA Antony Van Couvering
> > NameScout, Ontario, Canada Rob Hall
> > NameSecure, Moravia, CA, USA Gary Khachadoorian
> > NameSystem, Bridgetown, Barbados Jason Heldeles
> > Neteka, Toronto, Canada Greg Bertrand
> > VeriSign Registrar, Herndon, VA, USA Bruce Beckwith
> > Register.it, Bergamo, Italy Bruno Piarulli
> > Registrars.com, Los Angeles, California USA David Barbosa
> > SiteName, Rishon Lezion, Israel LM Service
> > SRSPlus, Los Angeles, California, USA Anthony Bishop
> >
> >
> > cc:
> > Dan Halloran (halloran@icann.org)
> >
> >
> > Requested Information about the signatories:
> >
> > What is the nature of the members of your group (e.g., individuals,
> > registrars, registries, trade organizations, etc.)?
> > ICANN-accredited Registrars
> >
> > What is the total size of your membership?
> > Approximately 100 are operational
> >
> > How many members of your group participated in the WLS feedback process
> > leading up to the final feedback provided?
> > 4
> >
> > How many members who contributed to the WLS feedback you provided to
VGRS
> > are involved or planning to be involved in the process of directly or
> > indirectly using the VGRS batch delete system for registering
just-deleted
> > names?
> > 4
> >
> > What efforts did your group make to reach out to members of your group
who
> > did not participate in the WLS discussion process?
> > The group signing this letter is not a formal group per se.  It is a
> > subset of all registrars.  We made efforts to reach dozens of registrars
> > to educate them and make them aware of this issue.  We did not contact
> > many members of the Registrars Constituency, both because they are known
> > to be submitting their own comments and because they are not
> > representative of all 100 registrars, particularly the over 70 who are
> > not active paid members of the Registrars Constituency.  (Indeed, some
of
> > the RC members compete with VeriSign or have proposals competitive with
> > VeriSign's WLS, or are in disputes with VeriSign Registrar).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ************************************
> James W. Archer
> Registration Technologies, Inc.
> 10 Crestview Drive
> Greenville, RI 02828
> 401-949-4768 (voice)
> 401-949-5814 (fax)
> jarcher@RegistrationTek.com
>
>