[registrars] WG: [council] Domain Tasting Design Team Proposed GNSO Council Motion

[Moshe Fogel]

Duration of AGP cant be as small as 10-12 , that will not leave time to 
detect a fraud and work against that.
I agree with Rob , that a small registrar can be harmed by an overnight of 
100s - 1000s  if not more false registrations.  We have experiences those in 
the past and still are.
Only last month we have lost about 5K for fraudulent .IL registrations (.il 
does not have any AGP at all).   I can speak to that in more details in the 
RC meeting.
So, better treshold should be made than only a 10% or 50 names.

Moshe Fogel
www.galcomm.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ross Rader" <ross at tucows.com>
To: "Rob Hall" <rob at momentous.com>
Cc: "Jeffrey Eckhaus" <jeckhaus at register.com>; "Thomas Keller" 
<tom at 1und1.de>; <registrars at gnso.icann.org>; "Adrian Kinderis" 
<adrian at ausregistry.com.au>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [registrars] WG: [council] Domain Tasting Design Team Proposed 
GNSO Council Motion


>
>
> On 8-Feb-08, at 11:34 AM, Rob Hall wrote:
>
>> So it needs to be a simple process that a Registrar can prove a  problem
>> and get forgiveness.
>
> I'm not sure that I agree with all of the examples that you've set  forth, 
> but nonetheless, I think this is a fair approach, so long as  the absolute 
> limits are very low before we have to request forgiveness.
>
> The other alternative would simply be to change the duration of the  AGP 
> to something very small - like 10-12 hours.
>
> Ross Rader
> Director, Retail Services
> t. 416.538.5492
> c. 416.828.8783
> http://www.domaindirect.com
>
> "To solve the problems of today, we must focus on tomorrow."
> - Erik Nupponen
>
>
>
>