Well, back to my second point, if ICANN rules and/or the registry doesn't
require such payment, and all registrars are on their honor to release
expired domains back into the pool, then why *would* they go to the trouble
to account for it? Even though the loss is only on paper, why take it on
the Network Solutions Registrar side if they didn't have to?
Based on the figures that Joe Baptista published to this list a few days
ago, they're on a downhill slide, and renewal revenues will be far lower
than in previous years. Why exacerbate it?
Regards,
Eric Longman
Atl-Connect Internet Services
+-------------------------------------------------------+
| Atl-Connect Internet Services http://www.atlcon.net |
| 3600 Dallas Hwy Ste 230-288 770 590-0888 |
| Marietta, GA 30064-1685 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
+-------------------------------------------------------+
----- Original Message -----
From: "William X. Walsh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WebWiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Alex Kells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 8:57 AM
Subject: Re[4]: Return expired domain to the available pool
Hello WebWiz,
Monday, September 25, 2000, 6:02:15 AM, you wrote:
> I believe Alex was asking specifically about the case where NetSol has
> failed to release an _expired_ domain back into the pool. I'm not so sure
> that they account for that by reflecting additional payment of the
registry
> fee.
Why wouldn't they? They are merely paying themselves. Any "loss" is
on paper only. The Registry and NSI-Registrar are both parts of
Verisign.
--
Best regards,
William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
