RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

Thanks for the feedback John.  We haven't ever considered offering both options so I don't know how realistic it would be.

 

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: John Wong [mailto:johnwong001@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 12:07 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: registrars@dnso.org
Subject: Re: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete

As an interesting suggestion, and without comment on the various payment and policy issues under either plan, would it be feasible for the registry to support *both* the auto-renew and auto-delete policies, and put an option on the registrar profile screen to allow the registrar to select one mode or the other (with corresponding payment terms, grace periods, etc)  for newly expiring domains?  Originally, we disliked the current auto-renew policy, but we have managed to tune our systems to accurately manage explicit deletions and explicit renewals.  The current auto-renew policy and it does seem to offer some additional safety margin for the registrants as well as for us against inadvertant domain deletions.  A registrar-selectable option would permit each registrar to select the mode of operation that best suits their business model and customer base.
Or as a more creative suggestion, perhaps the option for auto-renew or auto-delete could be implemented not only as a registrar-global option, but individually for each domain.  Each domain could have a new status value that would indicate if the domain would be treated under auto-delete or auto-renew policy. This might allow the registrar to offer/sell some additional options to their customers.  I suppose that this latter suggestion could be implemented solely at the registrar system level, but offered at the registry level it would contribute to some amount of uniformity with the two kinds of operations.

Regards,
John Wong
Domain Registration Services
 

"Gomes, Chuck" wrote:

 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

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael D. Palage [mailto:michael@palage.com]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:52 AM
To: tim@godaddy.com; registrars@dnso.org
Cc: Chuck Gomes
Subject: RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
 

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 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:29 AM
To: michael@palage.com
Cc: registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] Auto-Renew v. Auto-Delete
 

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