<div>Unfortunately, that is no longer the case. Bottom line is they have
no contractual grounds to stop it. If you review 2.1 of section 3
in Appendix C of their agreement with ICANN you'll see there are no
conditions on this activity.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><A
href="http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-appc-16apr01.htm#3">http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-appc-16apr01.htm#3</A></div>
<div><BR>As a result, and given current events, I think it may be time to
reconsider that.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Tim<BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE:
[registrars] Cape town agenda<BR>From: "Bhavin Turakhia"
<bhavin.t@logicboxes.com><BR>Date: Tue, October 19, 2004 10:29
am<BR>To: "'Tim Ruiz'" <tim@godaddy.com>,
Registrars@dnso.org<BR><BR>Hi tim,<BR><BR>I know that a year ago
verisign was policing this ...... I remember one of<BR>our resellers
tried this thru an api call and verisign warned us about<BR>abusive
behaviour the very next day<BR><BR>bhavin<BR><BR>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>> From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org <BR>>
[mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz<BR>>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 3:35 PM<BR>> To:
Registrars@dnso.org<BR>> Subject: RE: [registrars] Cape town
agenda<BR>> <BR>> Just to clarify my concerns regarding the ADD
Grace Period <BR>> and why I would like to see it as an agenda item
for Cape Town.<BR>> <BR>> Right now it is possible for any
registrar to register <BR>> hundreds, thousands, and even tens of
thousands of domain <BR>> names on a daily basis and delete the
worthless ones within <BR>> the ADD Grace Period.<BR>> <BR>>
For example, it appears that ItsYourDomain.com (Innerwise) or <BR>>
one of their clients may be doing that quite regularly. <BR>>
Although I don't know why they are doing it, one reason a <BR>>
registrar (or registrar client) may want to do that is to <BR>> take
a 3 or 4 day look at the traffic and decide which ones <BR>> are
worth keeping. Note that it is next to impossible for <BR>> this to
happen without at least the knowledge, and probably <BR>> the
assistance, of the registrar.<BR>> <BR>> A review of the
registries agreements with ICANN, our RAA, <BR>> and our agreements
with the registries indicate that there is <BR>> nothing that can be
enforced to prevent this.<BR>> <BR>> The question for us is, do we
think that this is acceptable <BR>> or is it an abuse of the ADD
Grace Period? If a large number <BR>> of registrars decided to
participate in this activity it may:<BR>> <BR>> 1. Erode consumer
confidence in our industry. Domains are <BR>> reported as not
available, then they are registered after <BR>> that by another
party.<BR>> <BR>> 2. Use registry resources for the gain of a
very small group <BR>> of consumers (speculators).<BR>> <BR>>
3. Consume registry bandwidth to the point where registrars' <BR>>
normal business activity is throttled.<BR>> <BR>> I would like to
see us discuss possible solutions amongst <BR>> ourselves and with
the registries. If our two constituencies <BR>> can agree on a
solution, I would see no reason why ICANN <BR>> would not
approve.<BR>> <BR>> Tim<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --------
Original Message --------<BR>> Subject: Re: [registrars] Cape town
agenda<BR>> From: "Marcus Faure" <faure@globvill.de><BR>>
Date: Tue, October 19, 2004 2:51 am<BR>> To: "Bhavin Turakhia"
<bhavin.t@logicboxes.com><BR>> Cc: "'Registrars List'"
<Registrars@dnso.org><BR>> <BR>> Hi,<BR>> <BR>> i
already sent an eMail to the list asking for the addition of:<BR>>
<BR>> * Using IANA IDs on registry level<BR>> <BR>> This could
be a subitem of transfers.<BR>> <BR>> Yours,<BR>>
Marcus<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > <BR>> >
Hi all<BR>> > <BR>> > Bob connelly had submitted a below
tentative agenda and it is <BR>> > important that all of you see
if you want any other items, or any <BR>> > specific people to be
involved in the meetings process and <BR>> post them <BR>> > to
the list immediately -<BR>> > <BR>> > --Registrar
Constituency meeting processes and email list <BR>> management
<BR>> > (closed meeting - constituency members only)<BR>> >
<BR>> > --Constituency Budget (Donna)(closed meeting -
constituency members <BR>> > only)<BR>> > <BR>> >
--ICANN Budget (BAG and ICANN staff)<BR>> > <BR>> > --ICANN
positions - process and timing for filling them <BR>> (ICANN
staff)<BR>> > <BR>> > --Transfers (TAG)<BR>> >
<BR>> > --Whois (task force reps)<BR>> > <BR>> > --US
Congress (GAO) Study on Whois Accuracy (Elana)<BR>> > <BR>>
> --Net Registry - rules for rebidding (ICANN staff)<BR>> >
<BR>> > --sTLDs - (ICANN staff) (sTLD applicants invited to
present)<BR>> > <BR>> > --Process for choosing new gTLDs
(may want to discuss <BR>> separately from <BR>> > registries
meeting)<BR>> > <BR>> > --Meeting with ccNSO (proposed
agenda) ICANN Budget<BR>> > IDNs
<BR>> > .eu presentation
(eu ccTLD manager)<BR>> > <BR>> > --Meeting with the
Registry Constituency (proposed agenda) EPP <BR>> >
Progress/Concerns Transfers Registry Maintenance Alerts & <BR>>
> Notifications ICANN Budget Issues (if still relevant) Global
<BR>> > Acceptance of new TLDs Evaluation of current TLDs
<BR>> Redemptions, and the <BR>> > old idea of not billing us
until the end of the grace <BR>> period Briefing <BR>> > by
registries of any new services they plan to roll out<BR>> >
<BR>> > --Meeting with the Business/IPC Constituencies (proposed
<BR>> agenda) ICANN <BR>> > Budget Whois / Privacy / Accuracy
ICANN and the WSIS process<BR>> > <BR>> > --Meeting with
the Non-commercial Constituency (proposed <BR>> agenda) Whois
<BR>> > Privacy Accuracy<BR>> > <BR>> > Best
Regards<BR>> > Bhavin Turakhia<BR>> > Founder, CEO and
Chairman<BR>> > DirectI<BR>> >
--------------------------------------<BR>> >
http://www.directi.com<BR>> > Direct Line: +91 (22) 5679
7600<BR>> > Direct Fax: +91 (22) 5679 7510<BR>> > Board
Line (USA): +1 (415) 240 4172<BR>> > Board Line (India): +91 (22)
5679 7500<BR>> > --------------------------------------<BR>>
> <BR>> <BR>> </BLOCKQUOTE>