Mailing List Archive: Re: Suspension of reissuing deleted domain names (fwd)

I think the reason NSI took the position they did was because these
companies re-register the domain after non-payment once it is released
back into the pool (probably repeatedly, and thereby causing the 'tens of
thousands of requests'). I think the only way to stop this type of action
is for NSI to require guaranteed payment on registration (account, credit
card, etc). The grace period given is too generous and allowing this type
of ridiculous speculation.

Ed

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Jon Lewis wrote:
:On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, David H. Holtzman wrote:
:
:> Until further notice, Network Solutions will be temporarily suspending the
:> process of deleting domain names for which payment has not been received.
:> In recent weeks the InterNIC has been spammed repeatedly with tens of
:> thousands of requests by domain name speculators attempting to register
:
:What can be down about domainbrokers.com? Have a look at the files at
:http://www.domainbrokers.com/asp/. I just tried to register a domain for
:a customer, and found that it had been registered the day before by
:domainbrokers.com. I believe they have no intention to use the domain
:name. All they hope to do is sell it, probably for $1000. They appear to
:have setup no DNS records other than NS records for it.
:
:Companies like this that piss in the domain name registration pool should
:be banned from registering domains.
:

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 11:38:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Edward Fang <edfang@visi.net>
X-Sender: edfang@london
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu

I think the reason NSI took the position they did was because these
companies re-register the domain after non-payment once it is released
back into the pool (probably repeatedly, and thereby causing the 'tens of
thousands of requests'). I think the only way to stop this type of action
is for NSI to require guaranteed payment on registration (account, credit
card, etc). The grace period given is too generous and allowing this type
of ridiculous speculation.

Ed

I agree with the above. Payment should probably be made before the
domain goes live into the root servers.

Another way to stop the mail floods of multiple people wanting the
same domain is to have an open registration period of a day or two
after a domain expires. If more than one party sends in a
registration for a given domain with that open period then the domain
is awarded by lottery or sealed bid.

As long as all interrested parties know that they have an equal chance
at a domain they won't need to send in a registration every few
seconds to see if they can get the "first come, first served" domain.

I would restrict the award of the domain to only those parties that
have a legitimate use for the domain itself. In other words, if
I am doing business under a name then the brokers would not be able to
get it. This would prevent preditory name grabbing for speculation or
for preventing other businesses use of a domain. Generic domains
(ex: news.com) would be awarded by lottery or bid.

This same policy could be used even for new domains.

I would *not* broadcast which domains have been applied for to prevent
people from saying "Gee, that's a neat name. Let me try for it too!"
and sending in a registration. You wouldn't know if you were the only
registrant until the waiting period was over.

--
David.Schmidt@on-ramp.ior.com Internet On-Ramp, Inc. (509)624-RAMP (7267)
Spokane, Washington http://www.ior.com/ (509)323-0116 (fax)