.UK Announced

Bailey · Oct 6, 2012

websaway said:
interesting

Please Don't encourage this sort of input _ it's totally the wrong thread:roll: IMO

It would never get pass Nominets supposed vetting - and we'll end up with dozens of other 'imagined' examples. No different from any other of the millions of domains you could attach 'co' in the text body of

websaway · Oct 6, 2012

Bailey said:
Please Don't encourage this sort of input _ it's totally the wrong thread:roll: IMO

It would never get pass Nominets supposed vetting - and we'll end up with dozens of other 'imagined' examples. No different from any other of the millions of domains you could attach 'co' in the text body of

I appreciate your point.

Back to basics, You can't sell something that has already been sold
UK commercial/business webspace = co.uk

Marcoose · Oct 6, 2012

invincible said:
The fact remains that, unless there will be vetting of all applications, direct.uk has the potential to confuse. The direct.uk is different from all others because it is sans a second level in the extension thus suffixing "co" to the end of any second level registration within it has the potential to cause significant confusion. There are many legitimate companies entitled "Someone and Co" who might wish to obtain "someoneandco.uk" legitimately. The "someoneandco.co.uk" might already be registered to another legitimate registrant. More confusion!

Surely, SURELY, with all these potential issues, Nominet can't go ahead with this. There are just too many flaws. I know it's easy to not want .UK to be released when you have a portfolio (albeit a modest one) of .co.uk domains, but surely anyone with half a brain cell can see this will be a terrible mistake.

I say again, this is way too big a change for Nominet to authorise, especially when they are only giving a three month "consultation" before making up their minds. Not to mention that we can't rule out money changing hands behind the scenes influencing this action.

This should be decided at government level after a very thorough, impartial investigation into the effects on all stake holders.

Even if I didn't own any .co.uk domains, after reading the pros and cons, I would be 100% against .UK (even if it does sound very nice

).

justbobet · Oct 6, 2012

Bailey said:
It would never get pass Nominets supposed vetting

.uk domains won't be vetted after the sunrise period (unless I've misread the docs).

Bailey said:
No different from any other of the millions of domains you could attach 'co' in the text body of

Therein lies the problem.

foz · Oct 7, 2012

eddieb said:
Generally most in the UK close on the 24th and re-open Jan 2nd. This varies a bit depending on whether or not Xmas falls during the weekend, in which case the bank holiday moves. In my own experience they expect their staff to save approx 4-5 days of their holiday entitlement to make up the days not covered by Xmas & New Years bank holidays.

Thanks eddieb. In NZ it would be 21st Dec closure, re-open 7 or 14th Jan. The chosen closure date for submissions by Nominet are met with cynicism by me. It will be the least thing on businesses mind to complete being in holiday mode.

poetry · Oct 7, 2012

interesting article

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/unscrewing-security/2012/10/nominet-a-website-by-any-other-name-would-be-more-secure/index.htm

foz · Oct 7, 2012

Any reason for the forms to be renumbered as time passes (unclear as to what content is being changed)? Are they being fine tuned as the consultation progresses?

http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/Nominet_FINAL_electronic_form1.pdf
http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/Nominet_FINAL_electronic_form2.pdf
http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/Nominet_FINAL_electronic_form3.pdf

websaway · Oct 7, 2012

It's noticable by their absence that some very prominent forum members have chosen not to comment on this issue. I wonder what I should read into that.

I bought, in good faith, a 2nd level uk business/commercial extension

2nd level NOT 2nd class.

I wasn't told that co.uk was a pilot scheme.

monaghan · Oct 7, 2012

Interesting thought from a registrar point of view... what happens if the vetting fails, you have still incurred a cost for processing the application, yet the customer doesn't get what they've purchased so would be expecting a refund. There's going to have to be a separate process developed for selling these domains to allow for cost recovery for failed applications. I would expect that the EPP/automaton is not going to give an instant response to the vetting, so a change to shopping cart processes will also be required in many cases. A new TLD to a standard domain sales shopping cart is a simple task, most are simple plugin modules, a 2 phase process may be more complicated to implement.

foz · Oct 7, 2012

monaghan said:
Interesting thought from a registrar point of view... what happens if the vetting fails, you have still incurred a cost for processing the application, yet the customer doesn't get what they've purchased so would be expecting a refund. There's going to have to be a separate process developed for selling these domains to allow for cost recovery for failed applications. I would expect that the EPP/automaton is not going to give an instant response to the vetting, so a change to shopping cart processes will also be required in many cases. A new TLD to a standard domain sales shopping cart is a simple task, most are simple plugin modules, a 2 phase process may be more complicated to implement.

I never received a refund on my short domain application fee

£6K down the drain as I recall.

martin-s · Oct 7, 2012

The verification and security issue strikes me as simple. They should make it available on all existing Nominet names on a voluntary basis, for a separate fee. (Thereby not affecting the basic existing registration process.)

Then they should work with the 4 major browsers to include a badge of some sort next to the padlock in the address bar.

They could work with Google to ensure it's used as an authority citation too, so there would be justification for small businesses to pay the extra. (Thereby providing the new revenue stream - indeed opening it out to all 10m existing names.)

Not exactly rocket science and not justification for a .uk extension?

monaghan · Oct 7, 2012

I wasn't thinking of Nominet refunding, I was thinking of the registrar's costs and systems, unless you sell to the end user as a potential registration. More and more complex wording in the T&C's that nobody reads I guess.

monaghan · Oct 7, 2012

martin-s said:
The verification and security issue strikes me as simple. They should make it available on all existing Nominet names on a voluntary basis, for a separate fee. (Thereby not affecting the basic existing registration process.)

Then they should work with the 4 major browsers to include a badge of some sort next to the padlock in the address bar.

They could work with Google to ensure it's used as an authority citation too, so there would be justification for small businesses to pay the extra. (Thereby providing the new revenue stream - indeed opening it out to all 10m existing names.)

Not exactly rocket science and not justification for a .uk extension?

I did suggest something similar (except for the browser mods) in my reply to Nominet.

Sam · Oct 7, 2012

Not sure if this has been posted some interesting comments posted

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/9578772/British-firms-offered-shorter-more-secure-.uk-web-addresses.html

stellar73 · Oct 7, 2012

wizard said:
Not sure if this has been posted some interesting comments posted

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/9578772/British-firms-offered-shorter-more-secure-.uk-web-addresses.html

Interesting comments yes, I particularly like the one about names ending in f, I may have to register get-to-f.co.uk now in the hope they eventually give grandfather rights;-)

Very misleading article though, can't believe their subheading states "co.uk addresses will be shortened to .uk"

websaway · Oct 7, 2012

wizard said:
Not sure if this has been posted some interesting comments posted

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/9578772/British-firms-offered-shorter-more-secure-.uk-web-addresses.html

have you read ron jacksons comments ?

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2012/dailyposts/20121001.htm

Sam · Oct 7, 2012

Yes i know more like the people posting on there dont have a clue .....

stellar73 said:
Interesting comments yes, I particularly like the one about names ending in f, I may have to register get-to-f.co.uk now in the hope they eventually give grandfather rights;-)

Very misleading article though, can't believe their subheading states "co.uk addresses will be shortened to .uk"

Sam · Oct 7, 2012

Yes i have if anyone has found anything else related to .UK that is a good read please post it up !

websaway said:
have you read ron jacksons comments ?

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2012/dailyposts/20121001.htm

websaway · Oct 7, 2012

Can anyone see where it would be beneficial for a co.uk owner (defined by nominet as valued stake holders who have been loyal supporters ) to vote in favour of these measures, where at best you have to jump through hoops and pay extra renewals to get the equivalent of what you already own and at worst you end up where someone with a recent trademark gets the .uk and a ticket to directly compete with your domain name or hold you to ransom to acquire it ?