[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Gross Deletes

[Bret Fausett]

Although I've raised this issue within the ALAC, while I served as the 
ALAC liaison to the GNSO, let me raise it here as well since we have 
many new participants in this ongoing discussion.

As background, a number of registrants and registrars are using (or 
abusing, depending on your point of view) a registry rule that allows a 
registrar to register a domain name for five days without paying for it. 
The original purpose of the rule was as a protection for registrars 
against having to pay for erroneous new registration requests. Back in 
approximately 1999, at the registrars' request, the COM-NET-ORG registry 
decided that it would not bill a registrar for a name until five days 
had passed since the registration; in other words, registrars would have 
a five day "grace period" to correct their errors without getting a 
bill. If a name was added in error, a registrar could delete the name 
within five days with no charge. This was a nice practice.

As pay-per-click ("PPC") revenue from domain name traffic increased over 
the years, however, the registration of massive numbers of domain names, 
all supported by PPC, became a viable business model. Any name that 
could generate more revenue from advertising than it cost in 
registration fees (ad revenue > $6.00) could generate a profit for the 
domain name registrant. Many of the businesses involved in PPC 
advertising began using the 5-day grace period to "try" a domain name 
before buying it. If during the five day grace period they noticed that 
a domain name had a lot of type-in traffic, generating PPC revenue, they 
would keep the registration. If it didn't, they would delete the name 
within the five day period, without charge. Some people have 
characterized this try-it-before-you-buy-it practice as "domain tasting" 
or "domain kiting."

As John pointed out, the massive numbers of registrations and deletes 
are primarily driven by a handful of registrars who are trading in 
domain names for their own account. Many of the names are recycled, from 
one "taster" to another. After all, if I hold a name for four days and 
see that it does not generate traffic, that information is only mine. 
There is no transparency around my traffic data. So I delete the name, 
and now John tries it. He reaches the same conclusion, and now Adam 
decides to take a peak. You get the idea....

So the question I've raised with the ALAC is whether and why this is an 
At Large issue? I can understand how the registries would view this as 
an issue; after all, they have to bear the infrastructure burden of 
millions of transactions without compensation. How are users affected? 
If they are affected, is this an issue that we should let each registry 
address by itself (e.g. .ORG recently changed its policy so that this 
5-day free period no longer exists) or should ICANN mandate a particular 
one-size, fits-all solution?

Food for thought....

         Bret