4th December - Drop List Roundtable

[Whois-Search]

We desperately need some secondary market representation at this Nominet Roundtable on Wednesday (4th December) in London:

Location:

Farmers and Fletchers in the City
3 Cloth St
Barbican
London
EC1A 7LD

http://www.farmersfletcherscity.london

Next door to Barbican tube station:

https://goo.gl/maps/EY3GHpSoaMqYy4MY9

Agenda:

9:00 – 9:30: Arrival Tea and coffee
9:30 – 11:00: Session one: Phishing
11:00 – 11:30 Tea and coffee break
11:30 – 13:00: Session two: Landing pages
13:00 – 14:00: Lunch break
14:00 – 15:30: Session three: Drop lists
15:30 – 16:00: Tea and coffee and close

Note: The signup form actually allows you to just choose session three only:

14:00 – 15:30: Session three: Drop lists

Signup here: https://r1.dotmailer-surveys.com/343r2a22-3f460o99

The consultation document is here:
https://www.nominet.uk/uk-domains/policies/2019-uk-policy-consultation/

Feedback from Leeds

After attending the Leeds Members lunch on the 21st November (last week) which covered the above topics.....

This is the impression I got:

Phishing: this is pretty much a terms and conditions change allowing registrars to take out phishing names legally (rather than relying on other terms such as incorrect data).

Landing Pages: this has obviously been requested by law enforcement and other government agencies. Most likely the agencies you see in the new Schedule 4 of the registrar agreement.

Drop lists: there is no clear way forward at the moment on this proposal. They made it clear all options are on the table. In my opinion they intend to produce a ROR style drop list with a set time eg. 2pm. However the current feedback they are getting isn’t positive about that. Everything has been mentioned in feedback from the registrar auction model in Estonia (.ee) right through to Registrars auctioning the names off directly under E.3.6 of the registrar agreement.

Therefore this week...

The technical team at Nominet obviously want to get rid of the DAC and the complaints about it. Replacing it with a timed drop list and aligning Nominet with standard EPP registries makes technical sense to them. However many questions remain unanswered about EPP access and they are sending technical people to the roundtable to answer them.

My main fear is that following the publication of the drop lists they will set the EPP access similar to what they did for the ROR drop: https://3million.uk/open-letter/

I have already expressed my concern about this to them (in Leeds) and won’t be attending twice.

Please attend if you are in London on Wednesday and share your concerns.

 

[RobM]

Why? They already know exactly what they're going to do.

 

[Ben Thomas]

Now is the not the time to give up though Rob

 

[RobM]

I gave up ages ago. Nothing has ever made a difference. Seems to be the in thing for people in charge to think that even if the democratic majority says they want something after being asked.. it can be ignored However if (when) they do introduce a 'pay per quota' system like they did with the uk drops it's going to massively cut down the field of drop catchers and remove the DAC. That's where they'll be headed. People will adapt and pay, or leave.

 

[Ben Thomas]

Doesn't seem fair to do that though. Surely they would want to encourage the kind of competition drop catching creates within communities like this? Growth thrives on competition.

 

[lazarus]

I think removing the DAC is a step in the right direction as long as it's on an equal playing field.
Looking after the big registrars (pals) again... failing on the many small ones would be a travesty.

 

[monaghan]

Can't be there, but have provided feedback to the survey, if you can't make it at least fill out the survey. They need to know that "encouraging competition" is exactly that and is not just about handing all the goodies to the big players, currently the membership and registration fees are the same for all of us so should the benefits.

 

[aZooZa]

The fact is that they don't care, as long as the drops continue to be picked up. I can't see any interest element on their part for 'fair play' or 'competition'. Just my 2p...

 

[Gill]

Can't be there, but have provided feedback to the survey, if you can't make it at least fill out the survey. They need to know that "encouraging competition" is exactly that and is not just about handing all the goodies to the big players, currently the membership and registration fees are the same for all of us so should the benefits.

Alex, do you realise that there's currently around seven members of this forum that receive a financial gain from nearly every domain that drops that has obvious value? They have software that exploits bugs/indicators in Nominet's software/systems and this gives them a huge advantage over those that don't have the same knowledge. These same people allow other members to use their software in return for a large percentage of any sale, a couple even have multiple linked memberships because they don't like sharing. This idea that Nominet is run for the benefit of the "big players" is a myth, the changes are needed because the current release process is heavily weighted in favour of this small group who by my estimation control or exert influence on over 70 tags/memberships.

 

[Gill]

Just to add, the more opportunities you give people to cheat, the more they will so Nominet need to remove as many opportunities as possible. I'd personally get rid of the rigid release procedure, scrap the DAC, allocate EPP requests based on the number of domains under a tags control and then start releasing domains randomly over a 30 or maybe 60 day period.

 

[monaghan]

Alex, do you realise that there's currently around seven members of this forum that receive a financial gain from nearly every domain that drops that has obvious value? They have software that exploits bugs/indicators in Nominet's software/systems and this gives them a huge advantage over those that don't have the same knowledge. These same people allow other members to use their software in return for a large percentage of any sale, a couple even have multiple linked memberships because they don't like sharing. This idea that Nominet is run for the benefit of the "big players" is a myth, the changes are needed because the current release process is heavily weighted in favour of this small group who by my estimation control or exert influence on over 70 tags/memberships.

So someone making a lot of money without being a large registrar is not one of the big players then? Encouraging competition is not just about complaining about 123-reg and others, it's about encouraging competition. I'm not saying it is better to be a domain investor than a large registrar. If you allocate resource limits on number of domains rather than equal you don't actually encourage any competition as the large domainers can manipulate the number of domains or their credit limits and it's the little people that loose out, after all it's the end purchaser of the domain that actually pays over the odds regardless of whether it's a big registrar or a big domainer that has registered the domain. The last bulk release process saw people just dropping shed loads of cash into the Nominet credit account to gain higher resource limits.

If you want a "fun" way of doing things, take a look at .NZ, during a short maintenance window they drop the lot in 1 go switch it back on and limit every registrar to X requests / second, that sort of system would shake up the market over here.

 

[Gill]

So someone making a lot of money without being a large registrar is not one of the big players then? Encouraging competition is not just about complaining about 123-reg and others, it's about encouraging competition. I'm not saying it is better to be a domain investor than a large registrar. If you allocate resource limits on number of domains rather than equal you don't actually encourage any competition as the large domainers can manipulate the number of domains or their credit limits and it's the little people that loose out, after all it's the end purchaser of the domain that actually pays over the odds regardless of whether it's a big registrar or a big domainer that has registered the domain. The last bulk release process saw people just dropping shed loads of cash into the Nominet credit account to gain higher resource limits.

If you want a "fun" way of doing things, take a look at .NZ, during a short maintenance window they drop the lot in 1 go switch it back on and limit every registrar to X requests / second, that sort of system would shake up the market over here.

The only competition now and during the RoR drops is/was between the same people that win every time and it's not the large registrars it's a few drop catchers. The majority of members that dropped £90k into their Nominet accounts were from this community, many of who have done very well over the years and to who £90k is pocket change, some were even leant the money in return for a share of any names they caught.

Companies like 123-Reg and Godaddy aren't interested in drop catching, there's no money it. DomainLore by the far the largest auction platform for .uk domains has generated less than £3 Million of sales in ten years! It's just a few vociferous members of this forum that have turned large registrars into the bogey man, plotting in secret with Nominet to snuff out smaller members, well I started catching names in 1997 and continue to do so with a modicum of success so they're doing a pretty shit job if that's the case.

 

[Gill]

If you want a "fun" way of doing things, take a look at .NZ, during a short maintenance window they drop the lot in 1 go switch it back on and limit every registrar to X requests / second, that sort of system would shake up the market over here.

You run a public facing drop catch service, how many names on average do you have booked a day, 5 maybe 10? A company that is a member of this forum created around eight memberships for the RoR drop and you're advocating for a process that gives that company an 8 times greater chance than you of catching any given name - assuming that you're honest and have just one membership. Why?

 

[aZooZa]

Jay D sorted .nz out as far as I recall. Could do with him back at Nom.

 

[Gill]

Jay D sorted .nz out as far as I recall. Could do with him back at Nom.

I'd settle for a decent coder

 

[monaghan]

The only competition now and during the RoR drops is/was between the same people that win every time and it's not the large registrars it's a few drop catchers. The majority of members that dropped £90k into their Nominet accounts were from this community, many of who have done very well over the years and to who £90k is pocket change, some were even leant the money in return for a share of any names they caught.

Companies like 123-Reg and Godaddy aren't interested in drop catching, there's no money it. DomainLore by the far the largest auction platform for .uk domains has generated less than £3 Million of sales in ten years! It's just a few vociferous members of this forum that have turned large registrars into the bogey man, plotting in secret with Nominet to snuff out smaller members, well I started catching names in 1997 and continue to do so with a modicum of success so they're doing a pretty shit job if that's the case.

I guess you have not read my comments then, it's not just a domainer or a big registry that gain, it's both. If the system is to change then it is to change to the entire process that needs to happen. I'm not bothered if it's the richest member here, the largest registrar or the one guy running a server in his bedroom that catches the domain as long as any new system they put in is level.

You run a public facing drop catch service, how many names on average do you have booked a day, 5 maybe 10? A company that is a member of this forum created around eight memberships for the RoR drop and you're advocating for a process that gives that company an 8 times greater chance than you of catching any given name - assuming that you're honest and have just one membership. Why?

Yes, I do run a small catch system, I don't make a lot from it, I could probably make more if I put more time into scanning drop lists and booking more of my own catches. I wrote the system originally as an intellectual challenge and then ended up with more enquiries than I could manage manually. Again IF you had read what I wrote then I'm suggesting that tags are linked correctly and policed, not just handed out as requested. If Nominet are to make changes then they have to be policed otherwise the best names will continue to be handed over to a small group. If there's no comeback for cheating the system, then people will continue to do so.

If you have evidence that someone created 8 companies in order to cheat the RoR then why not publish the details and pass to Nominet in the form of a complaint or raise it at the AGM, I'm sure the other members would want to know.

 

[monaghan]

Companies like 123-Reg and Godaddy aren't interested in drop catching, there's no money it.

No they don't need to as they can simply grab the suspended names and auction them off unchallenged

I presume you've submitted your views via the survey feedback request so Nominet know your views?

 

[Gill]

No they don't need to as they can simply grab the suspended names and auction them off unchallenged

Can you show me an example of this happening? I've heard about it for years but I've yet to see a single example of a large registrar keeping and auctioning a name that was due to drop.

I presume you've submitted your views via the survey feedback request so Nominet know your views?

I've worked with David Thornton to bring about this review.

 

[Gill]

I guess you have not read my comments then, it's not just a domainer or a big registry that gain, it's both. If the system is to change then it is to change to the entire process that needs to happen. I'm not bothered if it's the richest member here, the largest registrar or the one guy running a server in his bedroom that catches the domain as long as any new system they put in is level.

I've read what you've written but I'm confused because on one hand you say it should be a level playing field then advocate for a process that is more easily gamed than todays? How does dropping everything in one go create a level playing field? There's only a handful of names drop each day that have obvious value so yes your solution creates a lottery but the honest people only have one ticket whereas the cheats have 5, 10 or however many tickets they're prepared to pay for.

I believe that the process is either brought in house or truly randomised i.e. scrap the DAC and drop domains randomly during a 30 or even 60 day period.

There was apparently talk of sealed bids at the Nominet event in Leeds, perhaps Andrew Bennett can expand on that?

Yes, I do run a small catch system, I don't make a lot from it, I could probably make more if I put more time into scanning drop lists and booking more of my own catches. I wrote the system originally as an intellectual challenge and then ended up with more enquiries than I could manage manually. Again IF you had read what I wrote then I'm suggesting that tags are linked correctly and policed, not just handed out as requested. If Nominet are to make changes then they have to be policed otherwise the best names will continue to be handed over to a small group. If there's no comeback for cheating the system, then people will continue to do so.

How do you prove a membership is linked, it's impossible. Would anybody know if you asked one or more friends to sign up for a Nominet membership and then set them up with your software?

If you have evidence that someone created 8 companies in order to cheat the RoR then why not publish the details and pass to Nominet in the form of a complaint or raise it at the AGM, I'm sure the other members would want to know.

The evidence was submitted including links showing that some of the new members worked for the company in question, why nothing was done you'd have to ask Nominet that question.

 

[Siusaidh]

You all want fair access to names when they drop. Then I don't see how you can argue against making all dropping domains available to everyone, at the point of dropping, without intermediaries running scripts of any kind.

Simply open each dropping name to market demand. If anyone is willing to bid £50 for a name it should trigger an auction. Then the market simply takes over. It sells straight off for what people are willing to pay.

I'm not stupid. I 'get' that this is unpopular here.

But don't moan about unfairness if you're advocating any process that excludes 99% of the public at the point of sale.

Make the whole process transparent and available for any member of the public to take part in.