From owner-nanog@merit.edu Mon Aug 13 20:15:50 2007
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:37:09 -0500
From: Carl Karsten <carl@personnelware.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: [policy] When Tech Meets Policy...J Bacher wrote:
>
> Carl Karsten wrote:
>
>>> That is, if you extend domains on credit w/o any useful accountability
>>> of the buyer and this results in a pattern of criminality then the
>>> liability for that fraud should be shared by the seller.
>>
>> I am not sure tasting is criminal or fraud.
>
> You got what you ordered. You used it. You pay for it. It's that simple.That doesn't make anything criminal or fraud any more than free samples. If a
registrar wants to give a refund, I don't see anything wrong with that.It is not even close to that simple,
In and of itself, 'tasting' is neither criminal, nor fraudulent.
*HOWEVER*, available evidence suggests that a large proportion of 'tasting'
_is_ done "in furtherance/support of" criminal/fraudulent activities.
Registry operator data indicates that less than _six-tenths of one perecent_
of 'tasted' domains are kept by the taster.
Analysis of data from another registry operator suggests that that operator
is now processing roughly 3.25 _million_ *unpalatable* (i.e., _will_ be
returned) 'tasting' domain registrations =per=day=.
IF we postulate there are 100 million registered names with that operator,
then the annualized number of _returned_ 'tasting' registrations is around
TEN TIMES the total number of registered domain names.
_IF_ the registry operator is at least breaking even on the entire registration
process -- 'real domains' plug 'tasting' -- then it would seem that the
registry-operator fee for registration of a domain registration could be
reduced _by_a_factor_of_ten_, if tasting was the same price as a real
registration.
On the other hand, if the free tasting is 'out of hand' to the point where
registry operators are 'in the red' due to the 'incremental' costs thereof,
*that* problem also needs to be addressed. Life could be _really_ interesting
if a registry operator contract came up for renewal, and _nobody_ bid.
Anybody with _reasonable_ "plan ahead" skills can live with a week between
name registration submission, and the name going 'live' -- given that they do
know, _immediately_ that the registration is successful. Those who have
'urgent' need should pay a premium for 'expidited' service -- and those who
have a _legitimate_ need for such service will not balk at paying a
significant premium for that service. It _IS_ worth 'big bucks' to them,
because, even at that price, it is '_much_ cheaper than the alternative'.
I'd suggest:
1) one week latency between registration and entry into the TLD nameservers.
2) 50% (of 1-year registration fee) 'penalty' for cancelling the registration
before it hits the TLD servers.
3) $250 'surcharge' (to registrant) for 'immediate' _irrevocable_ recording
in the TLD nameservers, 25% of that surcharge to be retained by the
registrar, 25% to the registry operator, and 50% to IANA.