20i Reseller Hosting

Final .uk solution Nominet has produced is good for all

Discussion in '.UK Domain Name Consultations' started by Stephen, Nov 21, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Stephen United Kingdom

    Stephen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    13
    Nominet have made a real effort to incorporate the feedback into the final .uk solution.

    Nominet finally got the message and have put the UK namespace firmly ahead of; 'this is all do to with Nominet’s needs and desires'.

    The final .uk solution Nominet has produced is;
    • good for UK business
    • good for UK domain holders
    • good for .org.uk
    • good for new UK domain entrants

    It is not perfect solution but no new system ever would be perfect.

    Nominet even had some studies done to try to justify why .uk was needed as many had always expressed the view that such work should be undertaken to make the case why have .uk at all.

    Hope that the few problems created by the solution can be minimized further by identifying the issues and acting on them as soon as possible.

    On-going forward I hope Nominet will consider the following;

    Create a lookup tool on its website (and agreatplacetobe.co.uk) for any UK domain name that will advise what the situation is regarding the equivalent .uk. Adjusting for pre/post 28th October 2013 so will work with old and new registrations.​

    Scrap the Nominet £12 transfer fee now, it will help with renewal rate improvements and the free flow of .co.uk domains that are entitled to the .uk. Please don’t wait and introduce the scrapping to benefit large registrars, do it now to improve the UK namespace and bring it in to line with .com and .net etc.​

    Set a date for the postponed Nominet 2013 registrar meeting early in 2014, so to get feedback on .uk and other issues, so Nominet can take account of those views and observations which should help it fine tune implementation.​

    Consider how to reduce leakage of different ownership of .co.uk and .uk by changing renewal notices etc. to warn of the commercial and security dangers of not owning both.​

    Update the reserved list as soon as possible and if any domains that were on the proposal that are no longer going to be needed, please advise the owners of the .co.uk so they are put through unnecessary anxiety.​

    Nominet use Nominet.org.uk not Nominet.uk to support .org.uk.​

    Helpful for Nominet to issue guidelines to registrars about selling and offering .uk which include a clear statement about the 5 years to decide, so as not to unduly pressure people to pay when they don't have to. (idea from Andrew Bennett)​

    Hope that Nominet will realize that 'domainers' can help shape the UK namespace, for the benefit of all and that a new constructive relationship is established going forward.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2013
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Joined:
    1999
    Messages:
    Many
    Likes Received:
    Lots
    articles.co.uk
     
  3. Nigel United Kingdom

    Nigel Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2005
    Posts:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    48
    Good post and agree with your all your proposals. Nominet did finally get the message - but we mustn't forget their actions - i.e. disregarding the interests of existing registrants, doing all they possibly could in V1 to force through their proposals, failing to consult existing registrants using 'spam' as a reason, yet no media campaign to alert existing registrations to the ongoing consultations whilst, at the same time, spending money on radio promoting .co.uk and the agreatplacetobe.co.uk website.

    They're now saying they're not interested in maximising revenue :confused: but v1 was all about revenue - wasn't it £20 a domain they mentioned - together with massive cash generating auctions. They've been brought to heal by the opposition they encountered - look at the time everyone has spent in the last year taking on the nominet goliath. I hope they're not going to try to edit v1 from their website - it's important that those facts stay on file. I just did a quick search and it appears that information on v1 is disappearing. Look at this page:

    http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/consultation-new-uk-domain-name-service

    This is the original nominet page produced on 1st October 2012. The video link appears to have gone. And I can't access the v1 proposals from it anymore. Are the v1 proposals still on the nominet site anywhere? It's important that we don't forget what nominet tried to force through first time around.
     
  4. websaway United Kingdom

    websaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2007
    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    101
    Don't really want to backtrack but it is a recognised negotiating tactic to make the initial proposal extreme. They have succeeded and we don't know how much of the changes were already pencilled in subject to the measure of opposition.
     
  5. Stephen United Kingdom

    Stephen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    13
    V1 Not the case at all

    I do not think that is the case at all.

    It was extreme because that is what Nominet wanted to do and they believed it was the best way forward.

    On meeting them several times there was nothing about a 'plan B' in their thinking or approach in V1. At the end of the consultation some at Nominet released they had got it very wrong and started on V2 thinking, such as "oldest first" rather than grandfathering.

    In V2 they simple did not get work hard enough to study the V1 feedback provided and produced an ill thought out V2 .uk proposal.

    But finally the V3 plan is right and credit must go to Nominet for finally seeing what is best for the UK namespace and hopefully we can all work forward on that basis.
     
  6. Nigel United Kingdom

    Nigel Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2005
    Posts:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    48
    I also agree that it was extreme - but nominet were deadly serious about it proceeding. It seems they're trying to rewrite history. They're now saying:

    Nominet ‘profiteering’: A general theme of some responses was that SLDR reflected ‘profiteering’ by Nominet. This argument was often linked to a rejection of the underlying rationale for SLDR, which as we have noted, Nominet believes to be misconceived.

    Nonetheless, Nominet has considered further adjustments to the pricing of the SLDR proposition, recognising both the need for SLDR prices to be as competitive as possible in a global market place, and that maximising revenues to Nominet or our registrars is not part of the rationale for introducing SLDR.


    http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/SLDRdecisionpaper.pdf

    This same board is still in charge. We cannot simply overlook their past actions. The £20 v1 price combined with massive auction returns was clearly designed to boost their coffers. Why else would they have proposed such an extreme cash generating plan?
     
  7. Edwin

    Edwin Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    9,812
    Likes Received:
    528
    With apology to any vegetarians reading this thread...

    I think the final version of .uk is like a tasty sausage. You can eat it and savour the experience, but you don't want to look too closely at the steps that went into making it because you almost certainly won't like what you see...
     
  8. foz

    foz Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    3,034
    Likes Received:
    34
  9. Nigel United Kingdom

    Nigel Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2005
    Posts:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    48
    well it certainly feels like we've been through the extrusion machine :)

    BUT seriously its important that ALL aspects of the making process are available for anyone to view in the future.
     
  10. websaway United Kingdom

    websaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2007
    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    101
    I of course only speak for myself, but I don't want to see the sole purpose of this forum dedicated to Nominet bashing.
    We all know the damage that has been done, but it's time to rebuild, not prolong the agony.
     
  11. cm1975 United Kingdom

    cm1975 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2007
    Posts:
    3,484
    Likes Received:
    16
    A nice analogy!
     
  12. Edwin

    Edwin Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    9,812
    Likes Received:
    528
    Agreed. We should not forget the messiness of the process, but it is significantly more productive to focus on the result.
     
  13. AssetDomains United Kingdom

    AssetDomains Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2010
    Posts:
    2,979
    Likes Received:
    57
    +1
     
  14. Nigel United Kingdom

    Nigel Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2005
    Posts:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    48
    We also want to move on. Our livelihood depends on a thriving .uk domain market. We will move on BUT you cannot ignore statements that nominet make that conflict with the facts over the last 14 months. When I read that sentence '...and that maximising revenues to Nominet or our registrars is not part of the rationale for introducing SLDR.' my mind was drawn back to V1 and the massive cash generating proposals by nominet via the proposed £20 fee and massive auctions. What do you want us to do? shrug our shoulders, smile and think that's a clever way of putting it? Never mind - time to move on.

    No - anyone who takes a career in business, commerce or in an area of 'public interest' should think carefully of what they agree to, or make statements about. I want all aspects of v1 to be available to view on the nominet site permanently and then we can move forward.
     
  15. Stephen United Kingdom

    Stephen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    13
    going forward...

    We cannot allow .uk history to be rewritten and that is why the posts responded to your post saying it was "recognised negotiating tactic" but I do not want to live in history and keep going over how we got here and what if... etc.
    I as many I'm sure do want to move on in a constructive manner with Nominet and get back to our businesses.

    The bottom line is the final .uk solution that Nominet are implementing did take into account many factors and a lot of feedback.

    What I tried to do with this thread is be constructive on going forward from were we are now and hopefully people can comment on my suggestions and maybe add a few more?
     
  16. websaway United Kingdom

    websaway Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2007
    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    101
    I don't disagree with your objectives, simply the method.
    It's interesting to me that three of the board had to stand down for the final vote because of conflict of interest. Were they involved in formulating the original proposals ?
    I think it was important that this forum should throw everything at those original proposals, it did, and I thank everyone for their dedication. The risk we take now though is that the forum could be consumed by anti nominet threads which does the forum itself no good.
    This is just my opinion.
     
  17. mat United Kingdom

    mat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    3,907
    Likes Received:
    111
    I love sausages, but if the GF comes over and dumps another 4 on my plate and then tries to charge me £5 for each of them, there’s gunna be trouble!!
     
  18. Stephen United Kingdom

    Stephen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    13
    issue guidelines to registrars

    From a post on nominet forum by Andrew Bennett

    Helpful for Nominet to issue guidelines/rules to registrars about selling and offering .uk which include a clear statement about the 5 years to decide, so as not to unduly pressure people to pay when they don't have to. ​

    Hope Nominet can act on this quickly as otherwise there could be pressure selling to protect .uk.

    https://www.tsohost.com/campaign/dotuk
     
  19. foz

    foz Well-Known Member Exclusive Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    3,034
    Likes Received:
    34
    I wouldn't class V1 as a consultation, it was very biased (all set to pull the trigger). That's where all the mistrust arouse from.
     
  20. Nigel United Kingdom

    Nigel Well-Known Member Acorn Supporter

    Joined:
    May 2005
    Posts:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    48
    I have got no wish to carry on some anti nominet stance - but their statements need to be subject to scrutiny. I can't see why you would want to criticise me for simply pointing out that nominet's latest claim that the new SLDR was never about revenue generation is completely at odds with the v1 proposals. £20 fees and auctions was all about revenue generation - it would have brought an enormous cash pile to nominet. Doesn't it worry you that links to v1 appear to be disappearing from the nominet site? Shouldn't that original 1st Oct 2012 page remain just as it was published with all the links and information intact? Surely a forum like this is just the place to voice my concerns.
     
  21. max_rk

    max_rk Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2006
    Posts:
    310
    Likes Received:
    5
    The full credit for all this should not go to Nominet. Just look at absurd of V1 and Nominet’s internal legal advice they used, ridiculous!

    V2 by no means was complete or fair.

    The people that attended round tables, gave feedback and contributed to discussions deserve the credit. Nominet used our ideas to put this all together.

    Since V1 I believed that we need to work out how to implement .UK , it must be implemented we can’t turn back. So I am please with result.

    Also good to see that some people who did not like the status quo to change happy with the outcome. That makes .uk proposition even stronger.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.