<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
Mike/Tim,
Based
on a variety of requests from registrars, we have been carefully exploring this
issue for the past couple months. Mike - your assessment is
incorrect. We would actually like to go to an explicit renew/auto delete
approach. But I personally have been arguing against it because I thought
that this would create a bad situation for registrars. A week ago I
actually discussed this was Elliot and he was very supportive. What would
help us is to get a broader perspective of all registrars views on this as soon
as possible. Anything you can do to make that happen would be greatly
appreciated.
Specifically, what would be helpful is to know whether
registrars would support a requirement that registrars MUST explicitly renew a
name in the renew grace period. If a name was not explicitly renewed, it
would automatically go into the delete cycle (including the RGP period in the
future).
A
related idea that Elliot suggested is this: for some to-be-determined period at
the end of the renew grace period (e.g., last 15 days), all names not explicitly
renewed must be put on Registrar Hold. The purpose would be to use that as a
last warning to registrants that their name was in jeopardy.
Chuck
Thanks Tim,
This
helped a lot in clearing up my perceived misunderstanding. However, if you
read my most recent post, Pandora's Box, I believe VeriSign is likely to just
say no. Based upon the huge sums of money that VeriSign Registry is
sitting on, I just do not see them being magnanimous. If we were to try
to mandate an ICANN policy, I would bet the house VeriSign Registry is likely
to say that they relied upon this float in arriving at their $6 dollar price.
Thus if payment terms were changed by ICANN policy, VeriSign Registry could
request a fee increase.
As I
stated hopefully I am wrong, and Chuck Gomes will send me an email telling me
VeriSign Registry will agree to waive the fees during the 45 day grace period
(I copied him on this email). However, I would not hold my breath believing
that VeriSign Registry is just going to throw a huge financial bone to us
registrars.
Mike
Michael,
If I understand this
all correctly, what Eliot and Bruce are suggesting is that the 45 day grace
period stays in tact, during which the domain is not yet made available for
registration, but the registrar is not yet charged anything. If the
registrar does not explicitly renew the domain before the 45 days are up it
is released. The registrar is only charged when/if the explicit renewal
takes place.
If that's what we're talking about then I
don't see what the problem is, especially once the Redemption Grace Period
is in place. We've been watching the float we need growing month by month
and we haven't even gotten to our first 2 year
renewals.
Tim
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
From: "Michael D. Palage"
<michael@palage.com>
Date: Thu, September 5, 2002 10:43 pm
To:
<registrars@dnso.org>
Elliot:
I did think about the
words "grace period". However, the first thought
that came to my mind is
ADDITIONAL FEES. The grace period is not going
to be free, in fact it is
likely to be set at a highly level to
protect against potential abuse.
Therefore, why should I have to pay
additional fees for a redemption
grace period renewal or feel
compelled to purchase a WLS subscription as
insurance, when I can
chose to use a registrar that utilizes the 45 days
grace period. This
is an important feature that I would use in selecting
a registrar.
The change you seek in payment policy is totally within
your control
today, by just deleting the domain name after the
auto-renewal.
A little help from another registrar would be greatly
appreciated
because I feel that I am missing something
here.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Elliot Noss
[mailto:enoss@tucows.com]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 1:09 AM
To:
'Michael D. Palage'; registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars]
Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
Michael:
Both the renewal grace
period and the redemption grace period would
have protected you in your
case. The issue, again, is with the
registry charging us presumptively
during this grace period.
Think about the words "grace period".
Clearly they connote a period of
grace given to the existing registrant
on the existing term of
registration. These grace periods are appropriate
and the ONLY issue
is when the registry charges registrars for a renewal.
Clearly, this
should be when an actual renewal takes place.
The
only thing I am advocating for is a change in payment policy.
Full
stop.
And now, to
bed.
Regards
-----Original Message-----
From:
owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On
Behalf Of
Michael D. Palage
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 12:13 AM
To:
registrars@dnso.org
Subject: [registrars] Auto-Renew v.
Auto-Delete
Elliot/Bruce:
Wearing my registrant hat. I would
have lost palage.com if the
auto-delete
policy as you advocate was in
place. Despite my attempts to correct
and transfer my domain name, it was
not done in a timely fashion due
to complication by my registrar of
record. The 45 day window probably
saved my
a significant amount of
grief.
Wearing my registrar hat. The ability to control your float is
totally
within in your discretion since you can delete the domain name
at
expiration. I know that several registrars with corporate clients
use
this
45 day window to verify the customers intent and minimize
potential
liability. As a large scale registrar, the potential
risks/liabilities
associated with a 45 day float in connection with a
million plus names
is
considerable, and may outweigh the benefits of
accidental deletions.
However, the risk benefit analysis may not be the
same for a small to
mid-size registrar with a small
portfolio.
Regarding, Bruce's concern about an uniform delete policy.
I believe
this is
an important objective but not one that subject
registrars to
potential legal liability by having an auto-delete policy.
I think
there should be other potential solutions to an uniform delete
policy.
Mike
-----Original
Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org
[mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent:
Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:38 PM
To: 'Elliot Noss'; Rob Hall; David
Wascher
Cc: registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] Re:
Registrars Collecting on
Multi-Year
Registrations
>
>
> We need all
remember that we are currently pushing the
> Verisign registry
to
> change the auto-renew policy to an auto-delete/explicit
renew
> which would
> free up significant dollars for all of us
that currently gets
> tied up in
> maintaining an unnecessarily
high float with the registry.
>
Melbourne IT supports this
principle. It also has the benefit of
better uniformity in delete
procedures.
It is used in the new ".au"
registry.
Regards,
Bruce
Tonkin
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|