[gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D
asullivan at dyn.com
Fri Jan 22 20:43:37 UTC 2016
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 09:18:11AM -0800, Luis E. Muñoz wrote:
> The issue at hand is that in essence, we have two completely separate
> databases tracking the same object (the domain name) using (hopefully) the
> same rules to ascertain its life-cycle and expose it to the public,
> including the registrant.
I have to agree that this is in fact the problem. One of the rules
you learn early as a DBA is that storing the same data in two
different databases is a good way to store the wrong data sometimes.
Perhaps another way to look at this, however, is that there may be
different understandings of what this object is and what the role of
registrars is. One view (the one I confess I've always had) is that
registrars are basically retailers of a thing distributed by
registries. In this view, registrars are really just an intermediary
between a thing in the registry and the registrant.
But another view is that the registrars are actually packagers of
things sold be registries to the registrars. The registrar is, in
this view, more of a VAR. In that case, what the registrant gets is
_not_ actually what the registry sells, but a package that happens to
be made up of stuff, one component of which is the thing sold by the
I suspect the problem here is that we're not clear on which model is
in force, and as a result even when a registrar is working in the
"VAR" mode, the life cycle of the domain name which is implicit in the
"retailer" mode ends up exposed to the registrant. That seems like a
problem, and I am sceptical that it will be helped by giving the
registrant another expiry date to worry about. For I think that
requires the registrant to develop a theory of operation of the entire
registration market, and I think that psychic burden is going to be
too high for most registrants to be bothered.
email: asullivan at dyn.com
More information about the gtld-tech