Re: Definition of Registry

[Marcel Schneider <schneider@switch.ch>]

On Friday, 5 Jan 2001, "Peter Mott" writes:

I completely agree with Peter's analysis blow. But the
important fact for this group is: there are two models
for registries/registrars/agents. The 'lightweight'
registry model (just DB and connectivity) is mostly
used in gTLD's and will continue to be (one of the
reasons is that it has not the registry as a bottelneck).

The 'policy-setting' registry is more common in ccTLD's and
will continue to be.

The RRP needs to support both models. We should discuss
the reasons why it couldn't.


Marcel




>> it's the practice for the .fr registry
>> update of the database are requested by the registrant, through
>> the registrar.

> We have different views of the world.  Through my eyes I see domain name
> registration  being the execution of a legal contract between the registrar
> and the registrant.  The public record of that contract is the insertion of
> the name into the registry database.

> To determine the registrar, I simply ask the question "with whom does the
> registrant have a contract for the domain name registration?"  Whoever that
> entity is - is always the registrar.

> Not sure how .fr works, but I suspect the contract is in fact between the
> registrant and your organisation.  The party you refer to as registrar is
> probably acting as an agent for the registrant.  Your organisation is in
> fact the registrar.

> This may all seem to be splitting hairs, but its important stuff in my view.
> Understanding relationships and roles is required before developing system
> to support it, and protocol to enable system

>> registrar is a provider of added value (services) for the user
>> connectivity.

> My definition of registrar is simply an entity accredited to enter into
> domain name registration contracts with registrants.  This entity may have
> domain name registration as a core or supporting business activity.  It is
> not relevant.

>> In France, registry is a monopoly model (public service, not
>> registrar itself),
>> registrars are in the competitive sector.

> I think you will see from above that I dont agree with you.  What you likely
> have is a monopoly registrar (your organisation) with agents all offering
> the same registration contract (your TLD policy combined with business
> rules).

> Such a model does not support competition in the business of domain name
> registration.  Although I concede that agents can wrap your service in
> different ways to differentiate themselves.  I suspect however the major
> differentiation occurs between core service elements for the agent rather
> than the service of name registration.

> Please dont think I am a supporter of any particular model or have fixed
> views.  I have been studying this stuff in depth since 1996, own an
> accredited ICANN registrar (although not operational as yet) and admin for
> .tk .aq as well as registry operator for .pn

> What I have been trying to highlight is that it is the identification of the
> players and their relationships that is important, not so much where the
> data is.  If this wg proceeds with the relationship model in the draft,
> thats ok with me.  I just wanted to make sure people had the opportunity of
> considering alternatives.

> Regards

> Peter Mott
> Chief Enthusiast
> 2day.com
> -/-