<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Collecting Facts
- To: Patrick Jones <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Collecting Facts
- From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:43:27 -0700
<html><body><div>Kiting is a sympton of tasting, plain and simple. Some small
percentage of the million or more names a registrar may taste (for themselves
or their client) will get some traffic. That registrar or client will want to
taste those again to verify/recheck the results. I highly doubt any of the so
called kiters really believe or intend that they can kite name
indefinately.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Other names may appear to be kited but it is just that two or more
registrars may be getting their data on names to taste from the same or
similar sources. So it will look like the name is being kited but that is not
the actual intent. That could conceivably happen even within a registrar group
where the left hand isn't necessarily aware of what the right hand is doing.
There really isn't any need to be concerned with filtering out names already
tasted by one of your other registrars because it doesn't cost anything to do
it.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>All the data in the world isn't going to help you discern the difference.
My point is that kiting is possible because tasting is possible. The real
problems that our customers complain about, or that IP interests are concerned
about occur because of the volume of tasting due to the fact that its free.
There is no incentive to curb it, filter it, be thoughtful about it, etc.
because it is entirely free no matter what the volume.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Spending a lot of time debating kiting and digging up so
called kiting stats (that won't really tell you anything concrete
anyway) should only be considered *IF* it is decided that tasting is an
Okay thing and should be allowed to continue. Then, and only then, does it make
it any sense to debate and hash out other activities that can only occur if
tasting is allowed to continue as is.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>IMHO, tasting isn't bad for our industry because of kiting. Kiting is
just another example of why tasting is bad for our industry.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><BR>Tim <BR></div>
<div ><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px
solid" webmail="1">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE:
[gnso-dt-wg] Collecting Facts<BR>From: "Patrick Jones"
<patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx><BR>Date: Wed, July 25, 2007 4:35 pm<BR>To:
<gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx><BR><BR>I suspect that you are asking for
information that can only be provided by<BR>the registries - this would be
specialized data and it is not something that<BR>ICANN staff has.<BR><BR>If a
name is "re-registered" in one month, 3 months, 6 months or one year<BR>after
the initial registration (and deletion after 5 days), how can you call<BR>that
"kiting"? I think Jothan's comment earlier today was very helpful in<BR>drawing
the distinction between "kiting" and tasting. See<BR><A
href="http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dt-wg/msg00031.html";
target=_blank>http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-dt-wg/msg00031.html</A>. We
should be<BR>distinguishing between the "intent not to pay!
" ("kiting") vs "reviewing the<BR>suitability of a domain name" ("tasting"),
and then looking for specific<BR>facts and research on how the five day add
grace period may or may not be<BR>contributing to
abuse.<BR><BR>Patrick<BR><BR>Patrick L. Jones<BR>Registry Liaison
Manager<BR>Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers<BR>4676
Admiralty Way, Suite 330<BR>Marina del Rey, CA 90292<BR>Tel: +1 310 301
3861<BR>Fax: +1 310 823 8649<BR><A
onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=patrick.jones%40icann.org');
return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>patrick.jones<B></B>@icann.org</A><BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: <A
onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=owner-gnso-dt-wg%40icann.org');
return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>owner-gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann!
.org</A> [mailto:<A onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=
owner-gnso-dt-wg%40icann.org'); return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>owner-gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann.org</A>]
On<BR>Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh<BR>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 2:18
PM<BR>To: Neuman, Jeff; Paul Stahura; Danny Younger; Tim Ruiz;<BR><A
onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=gnso-dt-wg%40icann.org');
return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann.org</A><BR>Subject:
RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Collecting Facts<BR><BR>I would say the data would be more
relevant without restrictions of<BR>"re-registered more than say 3 times, each
time immediately prior to the<BR>last" -- if it is done twice by related
parties then I would consider it<BR>kiting, and it need not be necessarily
immediate since I imagine some of<BR>the kiters are smart enough to wait and
re-regis!
ter after some time. I<BR>would like to know how many domains have been
re-registered more than<BR>once and dropped during AGP, by any related
registrar, within a year.<BR>Of course it is tough to define 'related
registrar' and so maybe the<BR>best we can do is have the raw number of domains
dropped in AGP and<BR>re-registered within another 5 days, one month, 3 mos., 6
mos. and one<BR>year? That wouldn't necessarily prove that all of those domains
were<BR>kited, but may be useful info at least to show the maximum extent
of<BR>kiting.<BR><BR>Is this something ICANN Staff could possibly do, or would
we need<BR>registries to provide custom data?<BR><BR>Mike
Rodenbaugh<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A
onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=owner-gnso-dt-wg%40icann.org');
return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>owner-gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann.org</A>
[mailto:!
<A onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=owner-gnso-dt-wg%
40icann.org'); return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>owner-gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann.org</A>]
On<BR>Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff<BR>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 8:46 AM<BR>To:
Paul Stahura; Danny Younger; Tim Ruiz; <A
onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=gnso-dt-wg%40icann.org');
return false;"
href="https://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=replyall&folder=INBOX&uid=104278#Compose";>gnso-dt-wg<B></B>@icann.org</A><BR>Subject:
RE: [gnso-dt-wg] Collecting Facts<BR><BR>I will see if I can dig up some stats
for NeuStar....recognizing of<BR>course the amount of tasting in .biz is pretty
much insignificant at<BR>this point compared to .com.<BR><BR>Jeffrey J. Neuman,
Esq. <BR>Sr. Director, Law, Advanced Services & Business Development
<BR><BR>NeuStar, Inc. <BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|