.UK Announced

[Systreg]

Is there a video of the stream anywhere.

@ Caz, Wizard posted earlier saying:

I was told it will be available to watch in a few days

 

[websaway]

One attendee said that he supported the introduction of .uk but it was not about customers getting shop.uk it was about getting cambridgeplumber.uk
This is the danger of people thinking introducing the .uk will add this benefit.
Cambridgeplumber.co.uk and plumbercambridge.co.uk are both registered and both are currently not being used but can probably be purchased.
If .uk is introduced it will mean that cambridgeplumber.uk and plumbercambridge.uk will both get registered either by the current co.uk owners or by someone else and simply be for sale also. This to me doesn’t solve any problems and only helps Nominet and the registrar.

 

[Sound]

I was shocked by the quality of the web presentation, in my opinion, this was more like a home recording of a school nativity play rather than a presentation of a professional organisation. Operation of the sound system was terrible, it is basic practise to attempt to get more or less the same level for all contributors, if the chair was not giving time for the mic to get to those asking the questions, then I’d have expected the “sound man” to step in and provide his expertise to ensure that all were able to hear. Anyone in the room with a hearing disability would be reliant on the sound system, not just those of us watching via the web.

I'd also have expected the web broadcast team to be monitoring as a guest so they'd see the problems 1st hand rather than relying on the audience.

I’ve run PA systems from pub bands through to speech only public discussion forums so have some experience of what is required at a technical level.

I agree the technical support for the conference and web-cast were poor I am a professional sound engineer and it looked very much like a in house production with very little prep done before hand, I am sure the sound in the room was very different to the broadcast I did ask who was providing the technical support but never received an answer.

 

[Marcoose]

I was told it will be available to watch in a few days

Thanks Mr A. Called you Mr C WTF....sleep.

 

[DarrenTSO]

I think there's a big fallacy that all registrars are 100% for this proposal. Domain names for registrars are a very low margin product so nobody is getting rich from the launch of .uk there; additionally, there are costs for registrars in rolling out DNSSEC to their infrastructure as well as the additional friction as part of registration of the address verification.

For us it's not a black/white situation - I like the idea of a shorter domain for the UK namespace, but the devil is in the detail of the finer points of the proposal such as the release mechanisms and the address verification processes.

 

[tifosi]

I think there's a big fallacy that all registrars are 100% for this proposal. Domain names for registrars are a very low margin product so nobody is getting rich from the launch of .uk there; additionally, there are costs for registrars in rolling out DNSSEC to their infrastructure as well as the additional friction as part of registration of the address verification.

For us it's not a black/white situation - I like the idea of a shorter domain for the UK namespace, but the devil is in the detail of the finer points of the proposal such as the release mechanisms and the address verification processes.

When Nominet had their meetings with the top 20 public registrars their response was overwhelmingly yes, but that they didn't want to include the security measures.

No big surprise there. Easy new revenue stream with very little effort (or changes to their infrastructure). Having to do it all with enforced uk athentication & security measures I'm sure will dampen their ardour!

I was surprised not to see (or if there hear) from some of the bigger registrars today.

 

[websaway]

Thank you for saying so. Yes it was genuinely me on the far left of the panel (in a black suit).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did anyone ask how damaging the current proposals had already been to the uk namespace, especially to the org.uk which seems to me to have taken a battering.

 

[Blossom]

Domain names for registrars are a very low margin product so nobody is getting rich from the launch of .uk there

Of course they are, it's a numbers game.

 

[tifosi]

Of course they are, it's a numbers game.

Most of their revenue comes from hosting & services. Higher setup & maintenance but much bigger potential margins. Domains are just a way of selling the secondary profitable products hence the sometimes loss-leading domain sales.

 

[DarrenTSO]

I was surprised not to see (or if there hear) from some of the bigger registrars today.

Fasthosts, HostEurope, Register.com, Sedo were there that I saw. We are also part of that top 20 group. Several registrars put across the point that there is consumer demand for a UK domain at the second level, but as you say there is considerable resistance to the mandatory security measures and the release mechanism.

 

[Blossom]

Most of their revenue comes from hosting & services. Higher setup & maintenance but much bigger potential margins. Domains are just a way of selling the secondary profitable products hence the sometimes loss-leading domain sales.

Yes I know

Not only will the big registrars make a lot of money directly from selling .uk domains purely on volume - especially the ones that don't sell at practically cost price - it will prompt more people to buy the additional services. There's a lot of money in a .uk release.

 

[websaway]

I think there's a big fallacy that all registrars are 100% for this proposal. Domain names for registrars are a very low margin product so nobody is getting rich from the launch of .uk there; additionally, there are costs for registrars in rolling out DNSSEC to their infrastructure as well as the additional friction as part of registration of the address verification.

For us it's not a black/white situation - I like the idea of a shorter domain for the UK namespace, but the devil is in the detail of the finer points of the proposal such as the release mechanisms and the address verification processes.

I have not heard of anyone who does not like the idea of a shorter domain extension for the .uk webspace. But it's already got a .co in front of it, the question is how can Nominet possibly get rid of that .co

 

[Stephen]

Nominet meeting

Back from the journey to London Nominet meeting .

It was very difficult to get the attention of the chair to ask a question.

The chair seemed to relish "yes" answers to any part of the proposal but didnt ask them why they agreed with that bit, yet when somebody gave an opposing view it needed to be backed up and he moved on. However many of the short comings and concerns of the proposal were never really debated.

The only real applause was when a registrar, asked why is it not the Nominet staff on the stage, answering questions?

From the chair their was a worrying talk of growth, bold moves, getting market share and this is the way forward.

Although most Nominet staff pointed out several times, it is only a proposal both before and after meeting and they give lots of assurances they were listening and taking note of concerns.

I could not get assurance from Nominet that due to the wide range of varying opinions, that Nominet would put it back for a 2nd consulation so other stakeholders could see the new proposal with some pros & cons, instead it was stated it is still 1 of the three options namely;

1. not to go ahead at all
2. go ahead with changes and then implement it
3. make a 2nd proposal and put it out to consulatation again

There were several domainers present in addition to some proper registrars plus a few people on the fringe of domains.

 

[Marcoose]

Back from the journey to London Nominet meeting .

It was very difficult to get the attention of the chair to ask a question.

The chair seemed to relish "yes" answers to any part of the proposal but didnt ask them why they agreed with that bit, yet when somebody gave an opposing view it needed to be backed up and he moved on. However many of the short comings and concerns of the proposal were never really debated.

The only real applause was when a registrar, asked why is it not the Nominet staff on the stage, answering questions?

From the chair their was a worrying talk of growth, bold moves, getting market share and this is the way forward.

Although most Nominet staff pointed out several times, it is only a proposal both before and after meeting and they give lots of assurances they were listening and taking note of concerns.

I could not get assurance from Nominet that due to the wide range of varying opinions, that Nominet would put it back for a 2nd consulation so other stakeholders could see the new proposal with some pros & cons, instead it was stated it is still 1 of the three options namely;

1. not to go ahead at all
2. go ahead with changes and then implement it
3. make a 2nd proposal and put it out to consulatation again

There were several domainers present in addition to some proper registrars plus a few people on the fringe of domains.

Hats off to you, you did well.

 

[max_rk]

What I learned at consultation today that Nominet is totally focused on money out of direct .up nothing else. At the end of event I had chat with Piers White of Nominet and GrayWing. Priers White said, that on job interview with Nominet he was asked what he expects from the job at Nominet , he said - to embrace change! This is not his exact words but along those lines. When I asked who came up with idea of direct.uk he replied Nominet. I pressed him to name a person but he did not have anything to say to that at all. He was un-easy about both these questions.

Conversation moved on, later he said that because he is from financial industry, he sees registrars same as financial advisers, Nominet is product provider. “FA s should advise costumers hat tld they should buy”.

There is fundamentall flaw in that because .co.uk and .uk products are incompatible in the way its being proposed at the moment. Anyone serious would try to have both TLDs

Lastly I said that .uk creates massive traffic leakage problem. He did not understand what is that. He said is that when “user clicks once but then don’t click again”. I had to explain quickly what I am talking about.

Basically - youname.co.uk yourname.uk yournameuk.uk yournameuk.co.uk look confusingly similar.

It’s clear that Piers White who is on the Nominet board does not understand domains and how people use domains. He is there to make changes that look good on balance sheet.

 

[websaway]

What I learned at consultation today that Nominet is totally focused on money out of direct .up nothing else. At the end of event I had chat with Piers White of Nominet and GrayWing. Priers White said, that on job interview with Nominet he was asked what he expects from the job at Nominet , he said - to embrace change! This is not his exact words but along those lines. When I asked who came up with idea of direct.uk he replied Nominet. I pressed him to name a person but he did not have anything to say to that at all. He was un-easy about both these questions.

Conversation moved on, later he said that because he is from financial industry, he sees registrars same as financial advisers, Nominet is product provider. “FA s should advise costumers hat tld they should buy”.

There is fundamentall flaw in that because .co.uk and .uk products are incompatible in the way its being proposed at the moment. Anyone serious would try to have both TLDs

Lastly I said that .uk creates massive traffic leakage problem. He did not understand what is that. He said is that when “user clicks once but then don’t click again”. I had to explain quickly what I am talking about.

Basically - youname.co.uk yourname.uk yournameuk.uk yournameuk.co.uk look confusingly similar.

It’s clear that Piers White who is on the Nominet board does not understand domains and how people use domains. He is there to make changes that look good on balance sheet.

very interesting , thanks.

 

[tifosi]

As I said, on the webcast he came across as a bean-counter with an agenda. I'm sure the meeting would have gone a bit differently if the original chair hadn't been stuck on a train...

When you put a bean-counter in a position of responsibility in a technically-orientated company you're on for a hiding-to-nothing.

Were the other Non-execs and board members there? Didn't see Clive Grace, Seb or others.

For all concerned Nominet need to be absolutely transparent in the who and why of this otherwise down the line there's trouble ahead. Their evasiveness over marketing & economic surveys is concerning.

 

[GreyWing]

the whole thing is a shambles now, a lot has changed since the documents were printed. Yet people are still filling in the consultation form that doesn't tell them that US, Canadian etc TM holders will be involved, it doesn't tell them that. The UK issue has been shown to be pointless, yet still in the consultation. Malware is useless, DNSSEC leads to a lot of problems. The consultation doc has evolved so much it should now be withdrawn and rewritten as in its current form it is misleading.

It is all one big mess and I think I said in the meeting that it was "Incompetence of the highest order" to release the consultation in its current form.

My honest view is that Nominet don't have the power to do this, they have the power to try and cause one hell of a mess, but they won't pull it off.

 

[Paullas]

the whole thing is a shambles now, a lot has changed since the documents were printed. Yet people are still filling in the consultation form that doesn't tell them that US, Canadian etc TM holders will be involved, it doesn't tell them that. The UK issue has been shown to be pointless, yet still in the consultation. Malware is useless, DNSSEC leads to a lot of problems. The consultation doc has evolved so much it should now be withdrawn and rewritten as in its current form it is misleading.

It is all one big mess and I think I said in the meeting that it was "Incompetence of the highest order" to release the consultation in its current form.

My honest view is that Nominet don't have the power to do this, they have the power to try and cause one hell of a mess, but they won't pull it off.

Going of todays sham of a webcast i agree. Feed kept going off, couldnt hear half the questions, nominet didnt want to answer anything, the speaker fobbed the interesting questions off and to top it all off we are no clearer on what is going on.

 

[Stephen]

Not fit for purpose

At the Nominet meeting one of the panel trid to get a show of hands, if .uk was wanted but glossed over that Nominet would have to sort out the detail!

I did not want that vote, as the results would be very misleading, as we do not know which details they are going to change and to what!

I tried in instead to ask for a vote (show of hands) on who would take the proposal which is Nominet's best effort to introduce .uk exactly as it is.
There was no support from the chair for such a vote, as they know after hearing only some of the feedback their plans are flawed
and I doubt if anybody from Nominet would have even voted for it, as is.

The .uk proposal is simply "NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE"

Unfortunately as Nominet may go for some tweaks and a launch of .uk without further consulation,
then I hope all concerned will redouble their efforts to get Nominet to change the proposal (whatever your changes maybe)
rather than give in and accept that Nominet have already decided.