FC: Commerce Dept reportedly will put .us domain up for bid

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sun Jun 10 2001 - 22:00:34 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Porn sites, CyberCash entangle Virginia candidates for governor"

    ---
    
    Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 22:37:17 -0400
    From: Michael Sondow <msondowat_private>
    Subject: Privatization of .us: The DoC's Request For Quotations
    
    On June 11th, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) will issue a
    Solicitation/Request For Quotations (1) for a proposal to operate a
    registry for .us, the United States country-code top level domain.
    
    For three years the DoC has conducted a public inquiry into the
    reorganization of .us and has decided to put it up for bids, as if
    it were a commodity, rather than create a public agency for its
    operation. The deadline for submission of proposals is July 26,
    2001; that is, less than five weeks from now.
    
    Formerly run by Jon Postel at ISI (U.S.C.), the .us registry is
    currently run by Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI), a division of
    Verisign. NSI has done a very poor job. It has become difficult if
    not impossible to make new registrations and data changes like
    nameserver updates.
    For-profit companies like NSI, whose major revenue comes from
    servicing commercial TLDs or selling commercial domain names, have
    little incentive to spend time and money on free services, and they
    have no interest in developing .us to compete with their commercial
    TLDs.
    
    The notice of the DoC's solicitation states that the chosen registry
    operator will not be permitted to act as a registrar for .us. How,
    then, will it pay for its operations? Two methods present
    themselves:
    1) charge for the delegation and servicing of subdomains in .us; 2)
    create new second-level domains like .com.us and contract out
    registration services for these, either keeping the legacy
    locality-based domains (including the 3LDs run by the subdelegation
    managers) free of charge, or eliminating them altogether.
    
    A number of commercial for-profit companies will be making
    proposals. Two of these are Registrars.com and usTLD.org
    (us-register.com). The first - Registrars.com - is a division of a
    large networking corporation named Network Commerce, Inc. This
    company has stated to a .us locality manager that the company
    proposes to maintain the present structure of the TLD as well as the
    present locality managers without charge as a service to the
    community. Whether they would actually do so once they were
    operating .us and its new commercial SLDs is anyone's guess.
    
    However, Network Commerce, Inc. appears to be on the verge of
    bankruptcy (June 7 share price of 14 cents!), and is the defendant
    in a class action lawsuit by shareholders (2). Even if the company
    manages to survive and wins the .us registry, they are in no
    position to expend time, effort, and resources on unprofitable
    operations like the present locality-based .us delegations.
    
    The second company, usTLD.org (us-register.com), is an ISP that
    hopes to profit from commercialization of domain names under the
    locality-based structure of .us without creating new SLDs, and has
    promised not to charge the locality managers for their delegations
    and perhaps even pay them a kick-back for registrations.
    
    Here is what usTLD.org's CEO wrote to disgruntled subdelegation
    managers who thought that usTLD.org planned to charge them fees: "I
    am sorry if you guys got the impression that usTLD was going to
    start charging YOU for the services that YOU are providing!  On the
    contrary we intend to see that you get PAID for your work. The
    parties paying for these services will be the Registrars who are
    selling the domains for a profit".
    
    This is not very good news for the public entites you service. But
    it is probably unlikely, in any case, that the DoC will accept a
    proposal that does not provide for the exploitation of SLDs under
    .us, since almost all comments received during the public inquiry
    suggested that this be done, on the grounds that only shortened
    domain names would be popular and commercially viable and save .us
    from oblivion.
    
    There are sure to be other proposals submitted to the Dept. of
    Commerce, including one from Verisign or some corporation created by
    Verisign and its allies the ICANN-accredited .com registrars. These
    other proposals will most likely propose one of the above schemes,
    or a combination of them.
    
    There is, however, an alternative to commercial schemes for making
    .us profitable, and that is to run the registry as a non-profit
    corporation. This has been done in a number of countries for their
    ccTLD, for example Canada (3). The non-profit concept is the
    motivation behind this post.
    
    Briefly, the non-profit concept has the following key points:
    
    1) The .us registry would be run in accordance with policies
    established by a newly-created national association having a
    membership composed of delegation managers and the registrants they
    serve.
    
    2) All functions of this association, including the election of its
    board of directors, would be conducted by democratic methods.
    
    3) The registry operation would have two parts: one for the
    maintainance of the present locality-based system, the other for the
    commercial exploitation of new second-level domains in .us such as
    .com.us, .net.us, .lab.us, .nyc.us, etc.
    
    4) The proceeds from the commercial exploitation of these new
    subdomains, together with membership fees and dues and funding from
    grant agencies, would be used to pay for maintainance of the legacy
    delegation system and the operation of the association.
    
    This non-profit concept has already been discussed on mailing lists
    of delegation managers and non-profit entites interested in keeping
    .us in the public interest, and is supported by many. A proposal
    elaborating this concept, in response to the DoC's solicitation, is
    in the process of being written.
    
    If you are in agreement that .us in its present form should be
    maintained and that it should remain a public service, and if you
    believe that the delegation managers and the users of .us should
    take responsibility for ensuring that this happen, you can help by
    discussing it with the registrants you service and, together with
    them, offering your help and your support to this effort. Please
    keep in mind that the time is short.
    
    Michael Sondow (ICIIU)
    In defense of the public interest
    in the Internet domain name system.
    
    Notes:
    
    1. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/usrfp/cbd52501.txt
    
    2. http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/010607/17658.html
    
    3. http://www.cira.ca
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 10 2001 - 23:26:56 PDT