« Too Many Chef's in the Kitchen | Main | Calvin Ayres Bodog.com / LostOpportunityLife.com »

September 23, 2007


Jim Fleming

"Same pattern has a propensity to repeat each year."

This year may be different and one to remember. As a Domainer with your own Registrar, you may be immune from seeing the serious flaws in the Verisign .COM Registry-Registrar system [that they ?allow? ICANN to run].

In the old days, things ran much smoother. ISPs had direct access to the "Registry".

Now consumers are three and four levels removed and people are seeing what happens when 850,000 names become extortion footballs in that network of Registrars/Resellers/Brokers etc.

The .COM owners collectively need to come together and quickly agree on a long-term strategy that helps to protect their names. A duplicate .COM server cluster is a start and the move to the .COM edge registry will also help. That will make it more difficult for the extortionists(Sharks/Resellers/Brokers) to steal .COM names.

There is of course no incentive for Verisign and/or ICANN to make the system MORE stable and secure for .COM owners. They actually profit when 850,000 people find their domain names in chaos. Registrars also love it, they profit from the chaos.

In the old days, 850,000 names would not have dropped out of the Registry in a chaotic mess. It was a much more stable and secure system.

Beyond a plan to increase stability and security of .COM names, some thought should be given to the looming reality that ISPs, carriers, and even small countries could easily start to demand extra fees to resolve the .COM names. Anyone that sits between a large group of people (seats|eyeballs) and the .COM servers has the opportunity to set up a real-time tollbooth. There are already major services in operation claiming hundreds of thousands of users that they are "protecting" from some subset of names they have selected as bad. It would not take much for them to see that they could charge for resolving or direct consumers to **their** parking pages. Some may view parking as parking and pay no attention to the fact that the revenue goes to them, not you. You may never know that all of the users in Canada (as an example) go to some local guy's parking service.

This is the year that people are finally seeing what happens when you artificially force everyone into a .COM space. It is ironic that people are now saying that the obvious solution is to open up 10 or 20 thousand new TLDs, to spread out the chaos. It is likely too late for that and the focus needs to be on protecting .COM and more
importantly the integrity of the routing transport and the IP address space management.

People on The Big Island are not stupid.
They are collectively at least 5 to 10 years ahead of people in the rest of the world in terms of being subjected to the results of very bad so-called Internet Governance policies. The people on The Big Island get
to solve those problems now and the rest of the world will then follow. That "Same pattern has a propensity to repeat each year."


We are a team of young entrepreneurs that has built a solution for the changing environment in the domain name market. We are reaching out to you given your status and experience in the industry.

With the technology we have built over the past few months, we have built a turnkey system that can quickly turn static parked domains into dynamic, content-filled sites that look/feel like any other Web2.0 site out there (much like Rosenblatt's internal strategy for DemandMedia).

Joe Smith

WHy isn't there more outrage at registrars holding back good names? This is a blatant violation of their RRA agreements and ICANN policy. This is such an outrageous conflict of interests.

My theories:

1. complaints sent to ICANN are not taken seriously. ICANN always sends the complaint to the registrar contact and doesn't follow up.

2. registrars reps are the primary driver for change and do everything they can to keep the status quo and stall change with ICANN.

Hopefully someone will sue the more egregious violators (you know who you are)

The comments to this entry are closed.