[bc-gnso] FW: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Community Declares Success of AGP Limits Consensus Policy

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sharing some further info I got from ICANN Staff in response to some inquiries 
I made upon seeing this “Alert”.  Happy to hear any comments, but in sum I do 
not think there is any more to do on this issue and ICANN Staff can stop their 
reporting on it at this point.

 

Best,

mike

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

 <http://rodenbaugh.com/> http://rodenbaugh.com

 

From: Craig Schwartz [mailto:craig.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 8:19 AM
To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Rosette, Kristina'
Subject: RE: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Community Declares Success of AGP Limits 
Consensus Policy

 

Hi Mike,

 

I hope you find the following information helpful as a follow-up to your 
question about blatant tasting. Here are some data points and comments:

 

-      June 2008 there were 15,738,292 AGP deletes in .COM vs. June 2010 that 
saw 41,798 = 99.8% decrease

-      June 2008 there were 1,860,164 AGP deletes in .NET vs. June 2010 that 
saw 5,951 = 99.7% decrease

-      June 2008 there were 1,409 AGP deletes in .BIZ vs. June 2010 that saw 
850 = 40% decrease

-      June 2008 there were 35,052 AGP deletes in .ORG vs. June 2010 that saw 
2,908 = 91.8% decrease

-      July 2008 there were 18,945 AGP deletes in .INFO vs. July 2010 that saw 
8,887 = 53.1% decrease (Note: I used July rather than June as in June 2010 
there were an unusually high number of AGP deletes (far beyond the 2010 average 
monthly figure of ~6k) that were identified in an AGP Exemption Request from 
one registrar. That information was presented in the report recently provided 
to the GSNO and shared with the community.)

 

A particularly interesting statistic is to share with you is that the six 
registrars with the highest number of AGP deletes in June 2008 (for .COM and 
.NET combined) totaled 17,598,476 AGP deletes or roughly 59% of all AGP deletes 
for that month. In contrast, those six registrars reported AGP deletes in June 
2010 (for .COM and .NET combined) of 1,544 or roughly 2.2% of all AGP deletes 
for that month. Clearly for at least those registrars their business practices 
have changed in response to the AGP Limits Policy.

 

Further and in order to assess if there continues to be blatant tasting by some 
registrars, it would be necessary to identify the number of AGP deletes that 
resulted in an excess deletion fee compared to the total number of AGP deletes 
for a particular registrar per month across all the TLDs they are accredited to 
distribute. However, given the overall decline of 99.7% of AGP deletes, it’s 
unclear what the benefit of additional work would be relative to the costs of 
extracting that information and what this would really tell us. 

 

Lastly and as you noted in your 22 November 2010 email, there are cases where 
some registrars are deleting, outside of the AGP, a significant number of the 
names they added. What could be inferred from this is that they’re testing the 
marketability of these names and ultimately deciding to delete them. However, 
since these registrars have paid for the names, this doesn’t fit the definition 
of “domain tasting.” 

 

As always, I’m available to answer any questions you or the GNSO may have about 
the implementation of the AGP Limits Policy. 

 

Take care and have a good holiday weekend.

 

Best,

 

Craig Schwartz

Chief gTLD Registry Liaison

ICANN

 

From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 11:59 AM
To: Craig Schwartz
Cc: 'Rosette, Kristina'
Subject: FW: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Community Declares Success of AGP Limits 
Consensus Policy

 

Craig,

 

I recall that early on in implementation of this policy, there was still some 
blatant tasting activity centered at a few registrars.  I wonder if that is 
still so obviously happening, or not.

 

Do you know where the ‘Per-Registrar Activity Reports’ are for Verisign?  They 
are referenced in the recent Registry Operator Monthly Reports 
(http://icann.org/en/tlds/monthly-reports/) as ‘provided under separate cover’, 
but are not found from a quick search or near proximity on the ICANN site, or 
link from the Monthly Report.  They recently had been provided directly within 
the monthly reports, I thought?  Anyway I would appreciate help locating them.

 

Thanks,

Mike

 

Mike Rodenbaugh

RODENBAUGH LAW

tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087

http://rodenbaugh.com <http://rodenbaugh.com/> 

 

From: ICANN News Alert [mailto:communications@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 5:38 PM
To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Community Declares Success of AGP Limits 
Consensus Policy

 

 <http://www.icann.org/> ICANN


News Alert


http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-19nov10-en.htm

  _____  


ICANN Community Declares Success of AGP Limits Consensus Policy


Proposed Final Status Report to the GNSO Council on AGP Limits Policy 
Implementation

19 November 2010

The Add Grace Period (AGP) Limits Policy, implemented on 1 April 2009, resulted 
in a 99.7% decrease in AGP deletes and illustrates the success of ICANN’s 
consensus-driven, bottom-up policy development process. Community members 
identified a problem, initiated policy discussions, and generated a solution 
that has produced effective and sustained results.

ICANN today is posting its fourth and proposed final status report 
<http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agp-limits-policy-report-18nov10-en.pdf>  to the 
GNSO on the implementation of AGP Limits Policy. This report presents ICANN’s 
experience implementing the Policy, provides statistical information on net new 
registrations, AGP deletes, the percent of names deleted during the AGP for 
each TLD, and the disposition of exemption requests for the period.

ICANN committed to analyzing and reporting on the effects of the Policy to the 
GNSO at six-month intervals for two years after its implementation. The first 
status report 
<http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agp-limits-policy-report-10jun09-en.pdf>  was 
issued on 10 June 2009, the second status report 
<http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agp-limits-policy-report-14dec09-en.pdf>  on 14 
December 2009, and the third status report 
<http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agp-limits-policy-report-01jun10-en.pdf>  on 1 
June 2010. The purpose of these reports is “to allow the GNSO to determine 
when, if ever, these recommendations and any ensuing policy require additional 
clarification or attention based on the results of the reports prepared by 
ICANN Staff.” On 10 June 2010, the GSNO Council discussed whether additional 
Policy work was necessary based upon the results of the implementation and 
whether the reporting requirement should be amended or eliminated. At that 
meeting the GNSO Council determined that the successful outcomes from the 
Policy did not warrant additional work at that time and that staff should 
continue its reporting requirement through the end of the two-year cycle. The 
publication of this fourth and proposed final report fulfills this reporting 
requirement to the GNSO.

 



This message was sent from ICANN News Alert to icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. It was 
sent from: ICANN, 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 , Marina del Rey, CA 
90292-6601. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below.

 <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Email Marketing by
 <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> iContact - Try It Free!

 


  
<http://app.icontact.com/icp/static/images/icons/email_manage_subscription.png> 
 
<http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=11033829&l=6333&s=PWHD&m=332778&c=165637>
 Manage your subscription   

  
<http://click.icptrack.com/icp/track.php?msgid=332778&act=PWHD&r=11033829&c=165637>