> I am well aware of the intent of the authors of this document but I
> will suggest that this is actually going too far and is bordering on
> the anti-competitive.
>
> It appears that some of the less ethical operators are being dealt with
> through due process and there will be a binding code of conduct in
> place.
> This to me is overkill that actually harms the end user rather than
> protecting
> them.

Totally agree.. Once the registry starts and competition is able to begin
only domain name holders who are in the 2 month renewal period will be able
to transfer with out effectivly losing the licence that they have paid for
and they are intitled to.

This will cause the current registrars, melb it, connect, etc etc to
affectivly hold records and keep the market share, not really opening up
the market at all.

Also giving them time to be able to develop pricing policy that will
effictivly see all registrants stay.. why change when it's eaiser and just
as cheap not to... ???? If you have a domain name, it's registered,
delegated and working the renewal price is the final factor... extra work
just to renew will not help competition or the registrants to see a better
DNS..

Just my 2c

Michael-Pappas.


>
> rgds
> jon
>
>>-- Original Message --
>>Reply-To: dns§lists.auda.org.au
>>From: "Mark Hughes" <effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au>
>>To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
>>Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 00:08:21 +1000
>>Subject: RE: [DNS] Transfer of Registrar of Record
>>
>>
>>> And why should I lose the time on a licence that I've already
>>> paid for just because I wish to switch providers?
>>
>>
>>It isn't exactly spelled out in the draft Transfer document, but my
>>guess is
>>that the intention of making any transfer of Registrar of Record a part
> of
>>a
>>full renewal of the domain name is to try and deal with what I referred
> to
>>in my email as "Deceptive Practices" - i.e.
>>attempts to "churn" unsuspecting domain name holders from one Registrar
> /
>>Reseller to another.
>>
>>Which, of course, has been the single hottest topic on this listserver
> over
>>the last few months.
>>
>>Tying a transfer of Registrar of Record to a full renewal I think is
>>intended to sort of force the domain name licensee to think a bit
>>harder about what they're doing, and hopefully therefore not fall prey
>>to being unknowingly churned between Registrars.
>>
>>
>>Regards, Mark
>>
>>Mark Hughes
>>Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
>>effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au
>>www.pplications.com.au
>>+61 4 1374 3959
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Jon Lawrence [mailto:jon&#167;jonlawrence.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, 30 April 2002 23:26
>>> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>>> Subject: RE: [DNS] Transfer of Registrar of Record
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree.  And why should I lose the time on a licence that I've
>>> already paid for just because I wish to switch providers?
>>>
>>> Seems like a good deal for the registry though...
>>>
>>>
>>> >-- Original Message --
>>> >Reply-To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>>> >From: "Mark Hughes" <effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au>
>>> >To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
>>> >Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 23:06:59 +1000
>>> >Subject: RE: [DNS] Transfer of Registrar of Record
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Well, I said in my last email on this subject that I'd
>>> >
>>> >> try and get my thoughts /
>>> >> comments sorted out better and in more detail
>>> >
>>> >Finding time to read all the necessary documents and think them thru
> is
>>> >always a problem, but here's some further thoughts on the Transfer
>>> >of Registrar or Record issue.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >The draft document at
>>> http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-transfers-draft.pdf
>>> >has as Section 3.2 b):
>>> >
>>> >"the registrant must renew their domain name licence when the
>>> >transfer
>>> takes
>>> >place (i.e.. the registrant receives a new 2 year domain name
>>> licence from
>>> >the
>>> >gaining registrar)."
>>> >
>>> >The effect of this clause is critical - the process for changing
>>> 'Registrar
>>> >of Record' actually becomes a just a version of "Renewal of Domain
>>> >Name", with the proviso that domain name renewals can be done at any
>>> >time,
> but
>>> >they're always for two years.  In effect, we end up with 3 versions
> of
>>> a
>>> >similar procedure:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >1)  Application for a new domain name
>>> >2)  Renewal of an existing domain name
>>> >3)  Renewal of an domain name, with a change of Registrar of Record
>>> >
>>> >And one procedure document should be able to cover them all.
>>> >Treating
>>> them
>>> >as slightly different versions of the same process means that
>>> things which
>>> >are common to all three only have to be stated once, and the end
>>> >result should be simpler and much more consistent than treating them
>>> >as
>>> different
>>> >processes.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >The process is always going to be a tradeoff between:
>>> >
>>> >* efficiency - resulting in low costs to Registrars & Resellers and
>>> >therefore to Registrants, in a competitive environment
>>> >* effectiveness - resulting in a desirable outcome with regard to
>>> >policy issues
>>> >
>>> >There are specific policy issues which may affect one or more of the
>>> >versions of the application / renewal processes, and they appear
>>> to include
>>> >(in no particular order):
>>> >
>>> >* Authentication
>>> >* Bad Faith Registrations
>>> >* Deceptive Practices
>>> >* Validity Checking
>>> >
>>> >and there may be others I haven't thought of.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Looking at those policy issues in more detail:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >* Authentication - i.e. Authenticating the entity submitting a
>>> >request Authentication needs to be done at any time subsequent to a
>>> >new domain
>>> name
>>> >application where a change is made to the domain name details, to
>>> >the contact details for the domain name, or to a domain name
>>> >delegation.
>
>>It
>>> >doesn't really apply to new domain name applications as the
>>> entity applying
>>> >automatically becomes the authorised holder of the domain.
>>> >
>>> >* Bad Faith Registrations - i.e. discouraging them
>>> >Discouraging bad faith registrations should be done as part of the
>>> >domain name application.  It doesn't need to be done at domain name
>>> >renewal
> time
>>> >-
>>> >its difficult to see how any mechanism to deal with bad faith
>>> registrations
>>> >can be effectively linked to the domain name renewal process.
>>> >
>>> >* Deceptive Practices - i.e. discouraging deceptive practices by
>>> >entities other than Registrants (i.e. Registrars / Resellers /
>>> >Others)
>>> >The objective is to stop deceptive practices by entities on
>>> >Registrants designed to make the Registrant either pay more money
>>> >than necessary
> or
>>> >change Registrar / Reseller without their knowledge.  This applies
>>> >for Renewals with change of Registrar of Record.
>>> >
>>> >* Validity Checking
>>> >For domain name applications, the eligibility of the applying
>>> >entity,
>>and
>>> >the name they're applying for, need to be checked.  Following
>>> the existing
>>> >principle of grandfathering, validity checking is not necessary at
>>> >time
>>> of
>>> >renewal.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >In Summary:
>>> >
>>> >                      New         |         | Renewal with
>>> >                      Application | Renewal | Change of Registrar
>>> >                      ------------|---------|--------------------
>>> >Authentication           No       |   Yes   |   Yes
>>> >Bad Faith Registrations  Yes      |   No    |   No
>>> >Deceptive Practices      No       |    ?    |   Yes
>>> >Validity checking        Yes      |   No    |   No
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Having identified the policy objectives, it should be possible to
>>> >create one
>>> >clear procedure document to address the three versions of the
>>> >process:
>>> >
>>> >1. New Application
>>> >2. Renewal
>>> >3. Renewal with Change of Registrar
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >We'd then end up with a "Domain Name Application and Renewal
>>> >Procedure" document, and won't need a separate one for Change of
>>> >Registrar
>>> of Record.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Regards, Mark
>>> >
>>> >Mark Hughes
>>> >Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
>>> >effectivebusiness&#167;pplications.com.au
>>> >www.pplications.com.au
>>> >+61 4 1374 3959
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >-----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----------
>>> >List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>>http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>>>Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
>>>the
>>>
>>>author, further information at the above URL.  (310 subscribers.)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>>List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>>http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on
>>this list without permission of the author, further information at the
>>above URL.  (310 subscribers.)
>>
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>>List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>>http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on
>>this list without permission of the
>>
>>author, further information at the above URL.  (310 subscribers.)
>>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on
> this list without permission of the  author, further information at the
> above URL.  (310 subscribers.)