From owner-nanog@merit.edu Mon Aug 13 20:15:50 2007 Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:37:09 -0500 From: Carl Karsten <carl@personnelware.com> To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: [policy] When Tech Meets Policy...

J Bacher wrote:

...

Carl Karsten wrote:

...

...

That is, if you extend domains on credit w/o any useful accountability of the buyer and this results in a pattern of criminality then the liability for that fraud should be shared by the seller.

I am not sure tasting is criminal or fraud.

You got what you ordered. You used it. You pay for it. It's that simple.

That doesn't make anything criminal or fraud any more than free samples. If a registrar wants to give a refund, I don't see anything wrong with that.

It is not even close to that simple,

In and of itself, 'tasting' is neither criminal, nor fraudulent. *HOWEVER*, available evidence suggests that a large proportion of 'tasting' _is_ done "in furtherance/support of" criminal/fraudulent activities. Registry operator data indicates that less than _six-tenths of one perecent_ of 'tasted' domains are kept by the taster. Analysis of data from another registry operator suggests that that operator is now processing roughly 3.25 _million_ *unpalatable* (i.e., _will_ be returned) 'tasting' domain registrations =per=day=. IF we postulate there are 100 million registered names with that operator, then the annualized number of _returned_ 'tasting' registrations is around TEN TIMES the total number of registered domain names. _IF_ the registry operator is at least breaking even on the entire registration process -- 'real domains' plug 'tasting' -- then it would seem that the registry-operator fee for registration of a domain registration could be reduced _by_a_factor_of_ten_, if tasting was the same price as a real registration. On the other hand, if the free tasting is 'out of hand' to the point where registry operators are 'in the red' due to the 'incremental' costs thereof, *that* problem also needs to be addressed. Life could be _really_ interesting if a registry operator contract came up for renewal, and _nobody_ bid. Anybody with _reasonable_ "plan ahead" skills can live with a week between name registration submission, and the name going 'live' -- given that they do know, _immediately_ that the registration is successful. Those who have 'urgent' need should pay a premium for 'expidited' service -- and those who have a _legitimate_ need for such service will not balk at paying a significant premium for that service. It _IS_ worth 'big bucks' to them, because, even at that price, it is '_much_ cheaper than the alternative'. I'd suggest: 1) one week latency between registration and entry into the TLD nameservers. 2) 50% (of 1-year registration fee) 'penalty' for cancelling the registration before it hits the TLD servers. 3) $250 'surcharge' (to registrant) for 'immediate' _irrevocable_ recording in the TLD nameservers, 25% of that surcharge to be retained by the registrar, 25% to the registry operator, and 50% to IANA.