Drop list consultation

[philliph]

I fail to see how this is going to make it fairer for people who don't know how the system works. If anything this is surely going to make it easier for people who are tech savvy... removing the randomness would allow us to focus on exact times for everything you want for the day, whilst currently we have to spread DAC requests over a day and focus on domains we really want.

If load is an issue, why not just reduce DAC quotas.

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

The problem with expired auctions (for a registry) is more about IP rights.

Nominet need to value every expired string the same otherwise they will get in to all kinds of litigation. Premium names in new gTLDs tend to be on generic terms etc

So rather than thinking of Nominet being Sotheby’s.... Think of it as Nominet selling off sothebys.uk to the highest bidder ! Just isn’t going to happen without getting sued for trademark infringement.

If Nominet really wanted to make money out of this then the more likely solution would be a waiting list service which Alex Bligh proposed many years ago:

http://www.alex.org.uk/nominet/waitlistconsultation.pdf

However today you won’t get that past the large registrars who want a piece of the action and to actually take the risk and auction off sothebys.uk etc

 

[RobMRobM is verified member.]

The large registrars nowadays = nominet.

 

[3gmedia]

Perhaps they will follow how the dot co registry deal with dropping names. Seems to work for them.

 

[starbird]

Siusaidh if Nominet auctioned off all dropped names instead of letting then drop, there would be no drop catching, it would effectively be a monopoly. I don't see it going that far, I hope at least. It is anti competitive because all dropped domains would only be available from source. The new TLDs reserved the "premium" names, or the obvious ones at least. It is too late for Nominet to follow that path, they are released out into the public domain already.

I agree with RobM regarding what one persons view of "premium" is. The value is what someone is willing to pay not what someone thinks it's worth. Take a look on ukbackorder, domainlore etc some great names available, especially on .uk for what I think are great prices. More food for thought is if the UK splits up, Wales and Scotland have their own TLDs already , if merkel get's her way N.I would remain under eu control. England would then require it's own specific TLD, which I assume Nominet would create.

Interesting times ahead, changes are coming I just hope they are not too drastic and are fair. I like the current system, not caught any mega name but there is a chance, once a new system comes into play I feel that chance will be even closer to zero if they choose a pay to play to favor the large registrars.

 

[SiusaidhSiusaidh is verified member.]

Thanks Starbird, and thanks for your insights too, Rob. Quite clarifying. Definitely helped me to see the potential problems with an auction approach.

 

[Whois-SearchWhois-Search is verified member.]

The webinar on this is about to start:

https://www.nominet.uk/events/policy-update-webinar/

 

[stitchbob]

Nominet's role is to remain independant and impartial guardians of the UK domain space (Yeah, I know, but stick with me). For that to happen, they can't be in a postition where they are making decisions about the worth of any one domain over another - they must treat every domain equally. The new gTLD's have shown what happens when the registry is allowed to set the price of individual domains, where you have "premium" domains with £xxxx ANNUAL renewal fees.

I suspect what will happen here is at least one and possibly both of the following:

1. Instead of random timings, domains will be released on a schedule similar to ROR. Whether that will be hourly, daily, or something else remains to be seen. Instead of constantly polling the DAC, we'll just race to register at the specified time. A droplist will be released detailing the drop time for every domain, similar to the zone file already available.

2. There will be an additional annual fee for access to the droplist.

 

[RobMRobM is verified member.]

The beginning of the end. What's interesting is some people seem to think it's a good thing that everyone will know the exact droptimes because they think it will give them more chance with their tag. In actual fact it'll have completely the opposite effect. As it stands you are not competing with EVERY dropchaser the moment a domain drops - only the ones chasing it at the time. If they introduce that you'll be competing with every tag so your chances will massively decrease (unless of course you multitag like so many currently do). The next logical step for that would be to give people more attempts, or faster, depending on some criteria...such as..um... maybe the more domains you have on your tag the more attempts you get - or maybe even the more cash you 'deposit' the more attempts/faster connection you get.
One thing is certain - nominet already know *exactly* what it is they're going to push through (whilst pretending to give you an input) and it won't be to benefit anyone at all on this forum. This consultation is lip service. Since the last 'maintenance' it has become very clear that they have introduced the ability to speed up some connections that they decide on - there will be a reason for this - it can't be an accident.

 

[Aaron Clifford]

Getting some more of them sweet PayPal donations for anyone using my RoR script going forward.

 

[starbird]

I agree with RobM the current system is fair, you use up your quota and you're out. I might have to look into that zone file though, not seen that. I wonder if they will have this in place by next year when all those big registrar drops are due from them renewing domains no one requested renewed

I used up my quota many a time but I've caught a couple of half decent ones as well. This change would make it very difficult for everyone really because you will be competing with literally everyone at the same time. Even an alphabetical drop staggered in 6 hour increments e.g 0-F 00.00 - 06.00 G-M 06.00 - 11.59 ETC would at least use requests and there are usually several good domains spread across the alphabet.

No doubt we'll hear more in the coming weeks, months but I have a sneaky suspicion this will all be implemented before the big anticipated drop next year.

 

[armistice]

They said the consultation ends in December. Then they decide if a change in policy is justified, they said they aim to do that in 12 months from the end of the consultation (I'm not sure if that included implementation or just to decide).

 

[SamSam is verified member.]

Whatever they do won't matter if they are going ahead with it will happen even if the members don't agree just like the .UK launch

 

[BMW7series]

The aim appears to be to remove the inefficiency of the repeated checking of domain name availability using a service which is noted by some for having current technical flaws. Currently anyone who passes the minimal requirements to be a Nominet member, can afford the setup and annual fees, can attain services of a DAC hosting system and nothing much more can participate.

If the DAC is no longer required for drop catching, because every registrar participating knows the drop time of every domain name dropping, success will be afforded to the most efficient coders who can time their EPP Create requests perfectly.

Why would anyone who has the ability to perfect this want to lease it to others, giving them identical results? Surely those who did perfect this would all have a much higher chance of successfully registering all or most of the domain names they wanted than ever before using just a single registrar?

There shouldn't be any requirement to bombard the EPP with multiple Creates if timing is everything. The requirement to send many EPP Creates was only necessary during the ROR release because all domain names were released at the exact same time each day. Having all domain names drop at individual and specific times would appear to negate that.

The proposal also affords any other registrar, such as retail ones, the opportunity to participate. Many, who previously might not have bothered because of the requirement to repeatedly check for domain name availability using the DAC, might offer this as a retail service.

 

[ian]

.The proposal also affords any other registrar, such as retail ones, the opportunity to participate. Many, who previously might not have bothered because of the requirement to repeatedly check for domain name availability using the DAC, might offer this as a retail service.

They don't participate because the limits are set and cannot be skewed in their favour; they can however by EPP count if like the ROR the deeper your pockets, the more chances you have...the opposite of their suggested "fairness".

 

[BMW7series]

They don't participate because the limits are set and cannot be skewed in their favour; they can however by EPP count if like the ROR the deeper your pockets, the more chances you have...the opposite of their suggested "fairness".

It really might just be as simple as many of them see the inefficiencies of sending thousands of domain name availability checks over a twenty four hour time period for multiple domain names on behalf of their customers. If they knew an exact drop time they could develop their systems to send a single EPP create request for each domain name their customers had requested, along with working towards perfecting timing. That’s far more efficient.

There’s so far been no suggestion of Nominet varying EPP Create totals for any registrar wishing to attempt to register already registered domain names. What would be the reason for them to do so if every domain name dropped at a unique, predetermined and published timestamp? This isn’t the ROR where all domain names were released at the same time.

Those who are operating multiple registrars for drop catching purposes now, whether that be for their exclusive use using alias identities or by offering DAC hosting services to others, may find it becomes unnecessary and perhaps unprofitable to do so. The current total limit of EPP Creates that may be sent by just one registrar for already registered domain names would seemingly be ample for anyone attempting to register any domain name worth registering each day.

 

[RobMRobM is verified member.]

I hope you're not implying that people like myself who offer dropcatching systems are 'operating multiple registrars'. There is a big difference between multiple people using the same script (where many tagholders are using the same scripts they bought or lease) and somebody with multiple tags under one control which is against nominet rules. This kind of misunderstanding has already led to one incorrect veiled accusation on this forum. I don't 'operate' any registrar except my own.
However until nominet tell us what they have decided after this charade of a consultation we can't really say how everyone will adapt. Hopefully I'll be retired, or dead, by then anyway. We do know from past experience with price hikes and uk introductions that they only care about their own, and their top registrars', bottom line. It's easy for them to funnel the money from them - impossible from us. Just out of interest what made you join and post straight in this thread? Are you related to nominet? Not an accusation just wondering if they are sending in someone to butter us up Our NED seems to have gone AWOL - probably done their 30 days of work for the year.

 

[BMW7series]

I hope you're not implying that people like myself who offer dropcatching systems are 'operating multiple registrars'. There is a big difference between multiple people using the same script (where many tagholders are using the same scripts they bought or lease) and somebody with multiple tags under one control which is against nominet rules.

This kind of misunderstanding has already led to one incorrect veiled accusation on this forum. I don't 'operate' any registrar except my own.

Hello and sorry if i riled you because that wasn't the intention.

"Those who are operating multiple registrars for drop catching purposes now [cut] by offering DAC hosting services to others..."

I'll clarify that I meant facilitating the operation of multiple registrars... I hope that is clearer. I haven't examined every DAC hosting service in great detail to become familiar with how each one operates. They may all differ with their modes of operation.

I do think the likes of those will have some interesting decisions to make if Nominet do decide to publish exact and unique drop times for each domain name and have explained why I think that above. At the moment a great many domain name availability checks need to be sent to determine the availability of any specific domain name due to be deleted by the registry prior to an EPP Create. If all that is made redundant, meaning success comes down to efficient code and perfect timing, some registrars who solely exist to engage in drop catching may find themselves without a host if that host can now do very well for themself in-house.

Why would the best developers give away or lease or sell their new efficient and time perfected scripts to anyone else when they can register all or most of the domain names they wanted themselves?

However until nominet tell us what they have decided after this charade of a consultation we can't really say how everyone will adapt. Hopefully I'll be retired, or dead, by then anyway. We do know from past experience with price hikes and uk introductions that they only care about their own, and their top registrars', bottom line. It's easy for them to funnel the money from them - impossible from us. Just out of interest what made you join and post straight in this thread? Are you related to nominet? Not an accusation just wondering if they are sending in someone to butter us up

I don't enjoy posting on forums ordinarily. It commands a lot of time and I do enjoy being involved in many other things elsewhere which compete for my time. This topic interested me but I think I've probably said almost everything I can add.

 

[RobMRobM is verified member.]

It depends on how random it really is I guess. If it is random then of course people would lease their software - better to have lots of people buying or paying a license and have guaranteed income and *still* the same low chance of success. However nominet showed in the RoR that they lacked the ability and the infrastructure to actually release domains at the time stated so it'll just be a matter of time until people figure out their flaws. All they will be doing is removing the stress from the DAC and throwing extra stress on the EPP. This wouldn't make much sense though - they will need to find a way to give their top registrars the edge - that is what most people are interested in I think. How 'equal' will the whole system be. The automaton was far fairer and less resource intensive than the DAC - they scrapped that. For a while they got to take advantage of the EPP via certain avenues but now everybody is in on their problems. So now they will scrap this. The fairer a system becomes the less they want it.

 

[BMW7series]

It depends on how random it really is I guess.

From what I've read the intention is it wouldn't be random anymore. Firstly a daily drop list would negate the need for list building which is a waste of resources due to huge numbers of DNS queries and domain name availability checks sent.

A daily drop list with exact drop timestamps, or as near to exact as possible, would negate the need to check for any domain name availability repeatedly. Developers would come to know the margin of error +/- the published time and if that varied they could continue to compensate for that variance. That's how they would set themselves apart from others.

If it is random then of course people would lease their software - better to have lots of people buying or paying a license and have guaranteed income and *still* the same low chance of success.

I feel that may be the case when sending repeated domain name availability checks is necessary like it is currently. I'm not sure I think it will remain the case if exact and unique domain name deletion timestamps are published and the margin of error is tiny.

However nominet showed in the RoR that they lacked the ability and the infrastructure to actually release domains at the time stated so it'll just be a matter of time until people figure out their flaws.

I feel that was materially different due to the large number of domain names that were released at exactly the same time each day, for five days, and where a great many were contested for. Far fewer domain names are contested each day compared to during the ROR and the proposal appears to suggest unique drop times rather than everything at once.

All they will be doing is removing the stress from the DAC and throwing extra stress on the EPP.

Can't be sure. Depends how many EPP Create requests are sent at the moment for contested domain names by all registrars who participate and notice a domain names availability. If drop timestamps are published my thinking is that number of EPP creates would reduce.

This wouldn't make much sense though - they will need to find a way to give their top registrars the edge - that is what most people are interested in I think. How 'equal' will the whole system be. The automaton was far fairer and less resource intensive than the DAC - they scrapped that. For a while they got to take advantage of it via certain avenues but now everybody is in on their problems. So now they will scrap this. The fairer a system becomes the less they want it.

I am not of the view that there is a desire or even a requirement to give any registrar more EPP creates than others. As I said previously this is not the ROR with hundreds of desirable domain names being deleted at the same time. How many dropped domain names are generally reregistered during an average day? 100 or fewer? If 100, one registrars sending 5 EPP Create requests for each would still only use 500 creates. Far fewer than the total current limit per registar.