Re-sending TXT form of Proposed IDNA2008 Transition Idea

[Warren Kumari]

Warren Kumari
------
Please excuse typing, etc -- This was sent from a device with a tiny  
keyboard.

On Dec 14, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> With the caveat that I haven't given this deep and lengthy thought and
> I haven't discussed this with anyone else, the model and value
> proposition I have in mind is the following.
>
> The variants represent a potential for new revenue if either the
> existing registrant or a new registrant is willing to pay for it.  As
> a marketing strategy, the registrar can choose to register the
> variants for a period of time.  This would be a loss leader, but the
> costs would be minimal if the registry and ICANN cooperated to waive
> their fees.
>
> The technical detail would be for the registrar to send to the
> registry the same set of records associated with the base name.  This
> would be independent of whether the registrar were also the DNS
> operator or web service provider for the registrant.
>
> The registrants would all be notified but wouldn't have to do
> anything.  When the time period expires, the registrant could choose
> to keep none, some or all of the variants.

Um, to me this seems fraught with danger... Some registants will  
register variant-A, but many of their users will think of them as  
variant-B. After the timeout, many registrants won't realize how many  
users have been reaching them as variant-B, variant-C, etc, and they  
will choose not to renew them, and suddenly their users cannot reach  
th anymore... Yes, the registrant *should* be able to figure out how  
users think of them, but....

W


>  Whether this is a good
> deal for the registrars depends on the retention rate.  I'm not expert
> in this, but it seems to me it's *much* more attractive to sell a
> renewal of something the registrant has already been using than it is
> to sell him something new.  That's why free trial periods are included
> for software, XM radio, etc., etc.
>
> The cost for the registrars is a mass operation that does not require
> any buy in from the registrants in advance.  The cost for the registry
> is support for the additional names.  Pat Kane points out that some of
> the IDNs have an explosive number of variants.  I was focused just on
> the sharp-s situation, and the expansion factor there is likely to be
> pretty modest.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2009, at 3:34 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --On Monday, December 14, 2009 15:17 -0500 Steve Crocker
>> <steve at shinkuro.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Patrik,
>>
>>> Thanks.  Let me say this a bit more carefully.  My wording was
>>> indeed   imprecise.  The meaning I intended, particularly in
>>> the ICANN arena   where the registries are restricted from
>>> initiating registrations, is   that the registrar would
>>> registrar the variants on behalf of the   existing registrant
>>> at no cost for a limited period of time.
>>> ...
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how this would work, at least other
>> than on a case-by-case basis.  For the registries, ICANN could
>> do some persuading, could waive the per-name fee, or offer other
>> incentives.   And there aren't very many of them.   But it seems
>> to me that the registrars are a different matter: There are many
>> of them.  We know that a large number of them are in it
>> primarily for the money, with "smooth, stable, and secure
>> operation of the Internet" as not a very high priority.   Having
>> this be "no cost" means that they have to go to significant
>> effort to identify appropriate registrations and create new ones
>> without any expectation of compensation.  Worse, they then
>> either have to track the registrants down and work out with them
>> how the new zones are going to be delegated and supported
>> (costly) or have to support those delegations themselves (also
>> costly and with the potential of all sorts of interesting
>> security problems since, by definition, that means that the two
>> zone files are different except in the case in which the
>> registrar is already the registrant's zone admin (and maybe web
>> and mail service provider).  I don't see our being able to
>> persuade them to do that work for the general good as being very
>> likely.
>>
>> Do you have a different model in mind?
>>
>>   john
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update