<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Post expiry domain email functionality.
- To: "Diaz, Paul" <pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Post expiry domain email functionality.
- From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 20:30:34 +0000
On 25 May 2010, at 21:15, Diaz, Paul wrote:
> +1
>
> Google (IANA #895) and Microsoft (IANA #1330) are both ICANN-accredited
> registrars.
>
> ICANN itself has absolutely no mandate to play a role as competitive email
> provider, or as some kind of redirector to a third-party provided email
> service.
And if ICANN (or anyone else) were to attempt to provide such a service and
fail ie. mails getting lost, then I suspect they'd be sued ...
>
>
> From: owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Helen
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 4:00 PM
> To: Michele Neylon :: Blacknight
> Cc: PEDNR; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Post expiry domain email functionality.
>
> A suprising number of registrants notice their domain has expired only
> because the email stops functioning.
> So they might try asking questions of their registrar.
> Or they might actually look at their website.
> If it doesn't resolve or preferably:
> If it says clearly "this domain has expired.. click here to renew" isn't
> that much better?
> Do we really want third parties involved?
> And Google IS a registrar so wouldn't this be a conflict?
>
> Helen
> On 25/05/2010 10:57 AM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote:
>
>
> On 25 May 2010, at 14:53, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>
>
>> Dear Michelle
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight
>> <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 25 May 2010, at 11:31, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> I asked some Google Executives if there could be a technical solution from
>>> an external service provider such as Gmail to the post expiry domain email
>>> situation. The question was sent by email with a copy to Olivier Crepin
>>> Leblond of ISOC England / Euralo.
>>>
>>> While he doesn't find the commercial prospects for the external service
>>> provider convincing, his response points to the fact that technically there
>>> is a definite way out of the problem.
>>>
>>
>>
>> So who is going to pay for it?
>>
>> Definitely not the Registrars. It it takes it will take shape as a service
>> for which the Registrants will pay
>>
>
> Siva
>
> Pay who and how?
>
> Bearing in mind that you're talking about registrants who haven't renewed
> their domain names ...
>
>
>
>> or it will be a service offered on a neo-Interent-business model by a
>> company such as Google or MSN or it will be an ICANN supported service by a
>> third party.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It is not necessary to abruptly discontinue email service in a post expiry
>>> situation.
>>>
>>
>> Until you can answer the key question about who is going to pay for it then
>> it is going to be necessary
>>
>> Just because it's technically "possible" doesn't render it viable and the
>> email exchange clearly supports the view that we have all been promoting for
>> months. It makes MORE sense for the registrant to simply renew the domain
>> name in a timely fashion.
>>
>> I agree that it makes more sense for Registrants to renew their domain names
>> in time. But I am concerned about those Registrants (even if they are a
>> smaller proportion) whose domain names expire unnoticed.
>>
>
> And so you expect this "magical" email service to "know" where the mail is
> meant to go?
>
> You also expect people to be able to access it as well I assume?
>
> How?
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Also your suggestion in this email exchange suggests that ICANN would
>> somehow want to get involved with an "icann owned or icann-assigned server"
>> (sic) is disturbing.
>> Do you even understand what ICANN's role is in all this?
>>
>> What is wrong if I want ICANN to get involved in an ICANN owned or
>> icann-assigned server? It is not disproportionately expensive and it is a
>> direct service to domain Registrants about whom ICANN is supposed to care !
>>
>
>
> How are you qualified to decide what is expensive and what isn't?
>
> Just to satisfy my own curiousity ...
>
> How many mail users do you currently manage?
>
> How many mail servers do you currently manage?
>
> How many mail servers have you configured?
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> The email exchange is attached as a PDF for the committee to act upon
>>> futher.
>>>
>>
>> What committee?.
>>
>> Sorry, I meant WG. This PEDNR WG
>>
>
> OK
>
>
>>
>> Sivasubramanian M
>>
>>
>>
>> Mr Michele Neylon
>> Blacknight Solutions
>> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
>> ICANN Accredited Registrar
>> http://www.blacknight.com/
>> http://blog.blacknight.com/
>> http://mneylon.tel
>> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
>> US: 213-233-1612
>> UK: 0844 484 9361
>> Locall: 1850 929 929
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
>> -------------------------------
>> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
>> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
> ICANN Accredited Registrar
> http://www.blacknight.com/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://mneylon.tel
> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
> US: 213-233-1612
> UK: 0844 484 9361
> Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
>
>
> .
>
>
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
US: 213-233-1612
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|