[NA-Discuss] OUTCOMES REPORT OF THE GNSO AD HOC GROUP ON DOMAIN NAME TASTING

[John L]

> Generally speaking, the "Add Grace Period" (AGP) should be a net
> positive benefit for users ...

It's a very small benefit.  The numbers I've seen say that at legit 
registrars (as opposed to the kiting ones), about 1% of the domains are 
cancelled, so the AGP is roughly equivalent to a 1% decrease in the 
average registration fee.  That means it's an order of magnitude less 
valuable than Tucows' recent modest price decrease.

The AGP is the worst kind of insurance, because it's insuring against a 
low cost event.  If you register the wrong domain, the most you're out is 
the $10 or so that you paid for it.  This is completely different from the 
delete grace period where you stand to lose all the value you've built 
around a domain over many years.

> Earlier today, I realized that most current AGP exploits (kiting,
> tasting and their kin) would seem to be in violation of section 3.4.7 of
> the Registrar Accreditation Agreement as I outlined below to a post to
> the registrar constituency.

I suppose cart hold violates 3.7.4, but the vast majority of AGP deletions 
are from registrars adding and deleting huge numbers of typosquats 
mechanically, for themselves or for sham clients where there's no third 
party who might not pay.  The registrars who create 10 million domains a 
month and delete all but 23,000 of them aren't doing cart holds.

Really, the best thing to do about the AGP is to get rid of it.  Failing 
that, do something like Bob Parsons suggested and make 25 cents of the 
ICANN fee nonrefundable.

R's,
John