Nominet was formed in response to a collapse of the then current system of registering .uk (really .co.uk) domain names. The failed system was called the UK Naming Committe and provided a free service. This involved members of the Naming committee vetting each application with rules not dissimialr to those currently enforced by MIT. However, at the time it was a volunteer group, and there was no limited liability for members of the Committee (of which I was one) and thus members stopped looking at requests to avoid potential liability. Dr Willie Black was the equivalent to Robert Elz. He decided that something was to be done, and essentially drove the formation of what is now known as NOMINET. While there was considerable consultation, he acted as a benevolent dictator and to some extents this was the only way it could have happened. While details debated by the industry relating to policy and its implementation were included in the final Mem and Arts, the corporate structure was essentially determined by Dr Black. The chief advantages (as I see it) of the NOMINET model are as follows: NOMINET is owned by its members and membership is open to anyone/body prepared to pay the fees (which weren't excessive - 500 Sterling originally as I recall). It is managed by a 'board' voted in by the members. NOMINET _cannot_ distribute profits to its members (owners), and therefore must lower its prices as volume increases to avoid a surplus. NOMINET's Mem & Arts forbid it to do anything other than register names, thereby preventing it competing with (other) services offered by its members. As it cannot generate or distribute profits, any excess money is spent on the only thing it can spend it on - legal defense of itself (and its members) and upgrading the quality of its service - both technical and customer facing. So NOMINET is owned by stakeholders, is narrowly charged with acting as a central domain name registrar and nothing else and cannot distribute profits - ensuring that the pressure on fees is downwards. It is not a commercial player in the Internet industry and is seen purely as a collaborative endevour set up by the Internet industry to perform a needed central function while stimulating competition within the Industry. Effectively, as a DNA it offers a high quality service to its members, and leaves competition in end customer service up to those members. It discourages end customers from buying directly from NOMINET by a charging non-members twice the amount it charges members. This is reflective of the additional admin cost (almost all cost in domain registration is after all admin, not technical) of servicing individuals who are ignorant as opposed to Industry players (who mostly are too, but at least they do volume). The ISP is billed for all names they register (unless the ISP chooses to have the end customer billed, in which case they are charged double. British Telecom used to do this, but I don't know if they still do). And all this is distinct from the agreed policy wrt domain registration, which is irrelevant to the structure of the DNA itself. I'm not sure list members want to hear about the actual .co.uk policy. If so it is perhaps best left to another thread. Questions invited? _____________________________________________ Larry Bloch Chief Executive Officer NetRegistry Pty Limited email: larry§netregistry.au.com Office: +61-(0)2-9555 6299 Fax: +61-(0)2-9555 5808 http://www.netregistry.au.com Domain House, PO Box 2088, Sydney, NSW 1043 _____________________________________________Received on Wed Jun 24 1998 - 13:04:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC