AW: Definition of Registry

["Herbert Vitzthum" <herbert@vitzthum.at>]

Dear Marcel,

very clear view, thank you very much.

Herbert

> -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
> Von: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se [mailto:owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se]Im
> Auftrag von Marcel Schneider
> Gesendet: Freitag, 05. Janner 2001 11:38
> An: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> Betreff: Re: Definition of Registry
>
>
> 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
> > -/-
>
>